Ahmadi Asnawi JC:

[1] On 9 August 1987 a receiving order (R.O) and an adjudicating order (A.O) were issued against the judgment debtor (Rajangam @ Rasagam a/l Marimuthu Mudalliar, (hereinafter referred to as the "bankrupt") on account of his failure to comply with the bankruptcy notice issued by the applicant/judgment creditor (hereinafter referred to as the "applicant") and served upon him on 4 March 1987. The judgment sum, interest and cost due under the judgment obtained by the applicant on 14 April 1986 vide Batu Pahat Magistrate Court Summons No. 82-33-1986 was RM2,500. The amount due as on the date of R.O and A.O was a mere RM3,850.20. Consequently, the Ketua Pengarah, Jabatan Insolvensi, Malaysia (hereinafter referred to the "KP") was appointed as the receiver of the bankrupt's assets/estate.

[2] On 23 October 2002, the KP issued notice to creditors of intention to issue a Certificate of Discharge, a requirement under r. 194B of the Bankruptcy Rules 1969 (hereinafter referred to as the "Rules") to discharge the bankrupt of his bankruptcy, an exercise under s. 33A(1) of the Bankruptcy Act 1967 (hereinafter referred to as the "Act"). The said exercise was purportedly grounded upon the fact that the estate has been administrated for more than ten years; the bankrupt is now 58 years old; the judgment debt was less then RM10,000; the bankrupt could not be located anymore and the possibility of collecting further contribution from the bankrupt appears nil.

[3] The applicant objected to the issuance of the said certificate and accordingly filed his Notice of Creditors Objection under r. 194C of the same on 18 January 2003. However the applicant's objection was rejected by the KP vide their letter dated 27 February 2007.

[4] The applicant next proceeded to apply for an order prohibiting the KP from issuing the said certificate of discharge pursuant to s. 33B(4) of the Act. The said application is "saman dalam kamar", encl. 24. The grounds of his application were as indicated in his affidavit in support, encl. 24(A); the KP's reply in opposition is encl. 29. The applicant next filed two additional affidavits vide encl. 27 and 32.

[5] Enclosure 24 was heard and was allowed by the learned deputy registrar on 16 December 2008. Hence this appeal to the judge in chambers by the KP against the said decision.

[6] In support of the application, basically the applicant contended that ever since the judgment debtor was adjudged a bankrupt, the KP had failed all along to furnish him with relevant information in respect of the management of the assets of the bankrupt. The requirements under ss. 15, 16 and 17 of the Act were also not complied and observed. The bankrupt's Statement of Affairs and Financial position were also not brought to his attention and up to date he has yet to receive a single sen from the bankrupt's estate. Additionally as indicated in encl. 27 and 30, the applicant now avers that he is able to trace where the bankrupt now is and the relevant information has duly been conveyed to the KP but not acted upon by the KP.

[7] The aforesaid allegations were denied by the KP as indicated in the affidavit is reply, encl. 29. It was also submitted that the present locality of the bankrupt as deposed by the applicant is mere hearsay without concrete evidence.

[8] The relevant provision of the Act for the determination of this application is s. 33B(4) and (6). It provides as follows:

33B

(4) A creditor who has furnished a notice of his objection and the grounds of his objection in accordance with subsection (2) may, within twenty-one days of being informed by the Director General of Insolvency that his objection has been rejected, make an application to the court for an order prohibiting the Director General of Insolvency from issuing a certificate of discharge.

(5) ...

(6) On an application made under subsection (4), the court may, if it thinks it just and expedient

(a) dismiss the application;

(b) make an order that for