The appellant failed to provide sufficient grounds to warrant an extension of time for filing an appeal.

[1] We heard the appellant's (plaintiff at the High Court) Notice of Motion in encl 5 which sought for the following orders:

1. The appellant be given and/or granted leave to appeal by way of Notice of Appeal which had been filed on 21 September 2018;

2. The appellant be given and/or granted leave to file Record of Appeal out of time; and

3. Other reliefs and/or further direction related to the appellant's appeal if leave is granted.

[2] The appellant's Notice of Motion in encl 5 is supported by an affidavit of Mohamad Shahripoddin bin Abd Rahman, the Chief Executive Officer of the appellant affirmed on 19 December 2018 (encl 6).

[3] The respondent objected to the appellant's application by filing an affidavit in reply affirmed by Chan Siew Mei, the liquidator of the respondent, on 17 January 2019 (encl 8).

[4] The appellant filed in affidavit affirmed by Mohamad Shahripoddin bin Abd Rahman on 25 June 2019 (encl 9) to reply to the respondent's affidavit (encl 8).

Background Facts

[5] The facts of the case at the High Court were highlighted in the appellant's and the respondent's affidavits as well as in the written submissions filed in Court.

[6] The appellant filed a suit against the respondent in Kuala Lumpur High Court Suit No: WA-22C-20-02-2017 to claim, amongst others, for specific performance of a Settlement Agreement dated 14 May 2009 wherein the respondent had agreed to transfer 16 housing units to the appellant by way of contra for works performed by the appellant in respect of two contracts ("the appellant's Suit").

[7] The two contracts in question were as follows:

a. a contract for the construction and completion of an RC deck at podium level for RM926,682.00 ("RC Deck Contract"); and

b. a contract for the construction and completion of remaining building works and other associated infrastructure works (eg surau, preschool and multipurpose hall) in a low-cost apartment block comprising 146 units for RM1,059,789.00 (146 Unit Contract").

[8] In response to the appellant's Suit, the liquidators of the respondent filed Suit No: WA-22C-60-05-2017 against the appellant to claim for Liquidated and Ascertained Damages which arose from the appellant's late performance of works in respect of the two contracts above ("the respondent's Suit").

[9] The appellant's Suit and the respondent's Suit were consolidated pursuant to a Court Order dated 26 April 2017. The trial for the appellant's Suit and the respondent's Suit took place on 22 May 2018, 30 May 2018, 5 July 2018 and 19 July 2018. Parties were directed to file their written submissions by 13 August 2018 and reply submissions by 17 August 2018, and matter was fixed for decision on 20 August 2018.

[10] On 20 August 2018, parties appeared in Court before the learned judge Lee Swee Seng ("the learned judge"). After hearing parties' oral submissions, the learned judge delivered his decision accordingly. The appellant's Suit and the respondent's Suit were both dismissed, and the appellant was ordered to pay costs in the sum of RM80,000.00 to the respondent ("the said Decision").

[11] On 3 September 2018, the respondent's solicitors, Messrs Skrine forwarded a Draft Order in respect of the said Decision on 20 August 2018 to the appellant's former solicitors, Messrs Khamshah & Partners for their approval.

[12] On 21 September 2018, the appellant filed this Notice of Appeal and on 25 September 2018, the appellant's former solicitors served the Notice of Appeal on the respondent's solicitors.

[13] On 26 September 2018, the appellant filed an application in the High Court for an extension of time in respect of this appeal. The same was withdrawn by the appellant's former solicitors