SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2004 MarsdenLR 2122

HIGH COURT MALAYA, KUALA LUMPUR

RAMLY ALI J


JASHIN SCAFFOLDING (M) SDN BHD
versus
CHEW AI ENG SDN BHD; OCBC BANK (MALAYSIA) BHD (APPLICANT)

COMPANIES (WINDING-UP) NO: D5(D9)-28-884-2000

Decided On : 05-25-04

Advocates:
For the applicant - CK Ung; M/s Cheong Wai Meng & Van Buerle
For the liquidator - SY Lim; M/s Paul Ong & Assoc

JUDGMENT

Ramly Ali J:

The applicant in the present proceeding is a licenced financial institution incorporated in Malaysia, having a branch office at No: 36, Beach Street, 10300 Penang and an absolute assignee of the property known as Petak No. C 2.06, Tingkat No. 2, Kompleks Adorna, Jalan Brick Klin, Pulau Pinang erected on a part of Lot No. 492, Seksyen 10, Bandar Georgetown, Daerah Timur Laut, Pulau Pinang comprised in Geran No: 1854 ( "the said property).

The respondent is a company incorporated in Malaysia and having its last known address at No: 272-K, Jalan Air Itam, 11400 Penang; or at 413-4-F-A, Wisma Chuan Bee No: 413 Chulia Street, 10200 Penang or at 107-2-06 Adorna Complex, Gudwara Road, 10300 Penang. The respondent was wound-up by an order dated 18 January 2001 of the Kuala Lumpur High Court Companies (Winding-Up) No: D9-28-882-2000 and Messrs. S.K. Tee & Co. were appointed as liquidator of the respondent.

Via the notice of motion dated 16 October 2003 (encl. 25) the applicant seeks, inter alia, the following orders:

(i) that leave be granted by this court to the applicant, OCBC Bank (Malaysia) Berhad to intervene in the matter herein;

(ii) that the applicant, OCBC Bank (Malaysia) Berhad, may exercise its power vide power of attorney dated 23 January 1995 to do all acts necessary to create, execute or complete a registered charge over the said property, in the event the liquidator for Chew Ai Eng Sdn. Bhd., failed, neglected or refused to comply with the court order herein within six weeks from date of service of this order;

(iii) alternatively, that leave be granted by this court to Mr. Tee Siew Kai, the liquidator of Chew Ai Eng Sdn. Bhd., to do all acts necessary to create a registered charge over the property known as Grant HBM 127/M1/2/8 ( "the said property) in favour of the applicant OCBC Bank (Malaysia) Berhad;

(iv) that Mr. Tee Siew Kai, the liquidator for Chew Ai Eng Sdn. Bhd., shall do all acts necessary to create a registered charge over the said property in favour of the applicant, OCBC Bank (Malaysia) Berhad;

(v) that the creation of the registered charge over the property known as Grant HBM 127/M1/2/8 shall not be avoided under s. 293 of the Companies Act 1965;

(vi) that leave be granted by this court under s. 226(3)(a) of the Companies Act 1965 to the applicant, OCBC Bank (Malaysia) Berhad, to commence, continue and proceed with an application for an order for sale in the High Court of Malaya at Penang to foreclose the said property known as Grant HBM 127/M1/2/8 after the creation of the registered charge in favour of the applicant.

At all material times, the respondent is a client or borrower of the applicant. The respondent is the purchaser and assignor of the said property. At the request of the respondent, vide facility agreements dated 17 June 1997 and 23 January 1995 the applicant had granted banking facilities ( "the said facilities ") to the respondent in the following manner:

(a) Overdraft Facility of RM300,000;

(b) LC/TR/BA/SG/LG facilities of RM180,000; and

(c) FX Line Facility of RM18,000.

In consideration of the applicant granting the said facilities, the respondent assigned absolutely the said property to the applicant as security for the said facilities. For that purpose, a deed of assignment dated 23 January 1995 was entered into between the applicant and the respondent.

Thereafter the respondent defaulted in making its monthly repayments to the applicant and the applicant's solicitors had, on the applicant's behalf, issued a notice of demand dated 16 May 2001 to the respondent's guarantors and requires them to repay the total outstanding due under the said facilities. Upon the respondent's default in payment and the guarantors' failure to respond to the said notice of demand, the applicant then instructed its solicitors to commence civil proceedings to recover the outstanding sum as well as to commence foreclosure proceedings to realise the said properties assigned as security by t

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top