Siti Norma Yaakob JCA:

[1] This appeal arose from a judgment delivered in four civil suits, which had been consolidated as the causes of action in all the four suits are identical as they arose from a common transaction. That common transaction involved Credit Corporation (Malaysia) Bhd, the respondents before us, providing end finances of varying amounts to the following four family related companies:

(1) Syarikat Poh Kim Seng (M) Sdn. Bhd.

(2) Perabot Kheng Seng (M) Sdn. Bhd.

(3) King Sing Supermarket Sdn. Bhd.

(4) Bumibaru (Malaysia) Sdn. Bhd.

('the companies') to enable the companies to purchase four warehouses cum offices.

[2] The companies are the 1st appellants before us and the 1st defendants in each of the four civil suits.

[3] As securities for such loans, the properties purchased were charged to the respondents and additionally the respective directors of the respective companies also gave their personal guarantees that in the event the companies, as the principal debtors, defaulted in their obligations under the respective loan agreements, they, the respective directors agree to be personally liable to repay the respective loans to the respondents. It is in respect of these guarantees that the present appeal before us are founded.

[4] Four separate guarantees were executed by the respective directors of the respective companies and all the six directors are family members, they being the father, the mother, the three sons and a daughter-in-law. All the guarantees are dated 7 February 1984, and the six guarantors are the other appellants before us.

[5] In the court below all the appellants deny liability for the sums claimed by the respondent. A number of defences have been pleaded by the guarantors in the respective civil suits but at the trial, these defences have been narrowed to the allegation that the signatures of Toh Kim Chuan, the father, and Ong Sen Tuan, the mother, appearing on two guarantees and that of Vun Nget Len, the sister-in-law appearing in one guarantee had been forged and they are absolved from any liability for the sums claimed by the respondents.

[6] Relying on that same forgery plea, the other guarantors, namely the three sons, also claim that such forgery had also vitiated the guarantees that they had executed.

[7] Based on these narrowed defences, Ian HC Chin, J posed the following three issues.

(1) Whether the signatures of the disputed guarantors namely the father, mother and sister-in-law appearing in the relevant guarantees are forgeries.

(2) If indeed their signatures had been forged, whether all the six guarantors are discharged of their liabilities.

(3) If liabilities have been established what are the amounts that are owing to the respondent.

[8] Although there is no direct evidence to show the due execution of the guarantees, it is not disputed that all the guarantees were prepared by the respondents' solicitors, Nicholas Fong Wong & Co. and in the case of the guarantees of the three brothers they were signed before a legal clerk of the firm, PW2 but not before the attesting lawyer, PW4. PW2, however was not able to recollect whether the three disputed guarantors signed their respective guarantees in her presence. On balance since one of the securities agreed upon by the parties was the personal guarantees of the directors, it is highly improbable that the loans would be granted to the companies, had the directors not executed the guarantees.

[9] Since the father had passed away on 10 April 1994, his son, Poh Thian Hui testified and identified that the signatures in Chinese characters against his father's name do not belong to his father. He explained that his father had, since 1982, suffered a series of minor strokes that left the right side of his body weak. As he was a right handed person, he was not able to use his right hand to write. The learned judge made the following observations.

A passport of Poh Kim Chuan, issued on December 29, 1992, and bearing his thumb-prin