JUDGMENT

Ahmadi Asnawi JC:

[1] On 15 February 1994 a receiving order (R.O) and adjudicating order (A.O) were issued against the judgment debtor (Endon binti Tamseran, hereinafter referred to as the "bankrupt") on account of her failure to comply with the bankruptcy notice issued by the applicant/judgment creditor (hereinafter referred to as the "applicant") and served upon her on 22 July 1993. The amount, interest and cost due under the judgment obtained by the applicant on 19 September 1988 in Batu Pahat Magistrate Court Summons No. 82-144-1988 stated in the said notice amounted to RM13,437.46. Consequently the Ketua Pengarah, Jabatan Insolvensi Malaysia (hereinafter referred to as the "KP JIM") was appointed as the receiver of the bankrupt's assets.

[2] On 1 August 2003 the KP JIM purportedly exercised his discretion under s. 33A(1) of the Bankruptcy Act 1967 (herein after referred to as the "Act") to issue a certificate of discharge to discharge the bankrupt of her bankruptcy on the grounds that she is now 65 years old; all her assets has been realised; there were no longer any more contribution to the estate and that the case is not moving any further.

[3] Pursuant thereto, the KP JIM on 4 November 2003, issued Notice to Creditors of Intention to Issue a Certificate of Discharge, a requirement under r. 194B of the Bankruptcy Rules 1969 (herein after referred to as the "Rules") (see exh. PSWS01 of encl. 20). The applicant objected to the issuance of the said certificate and accordingly filed his Notice of Creditor's Objection under r. 194C of the same on 24 November 2003 (see exh. PSWS02 of encl. 20). However the applicant's objection was rejected by the KP JIM on 2 August 2004 vide their letter dated the same instant (see exh. PSWS03 of encl. 20).

[4] Being aggrieved by the said rejection, on 27 August 2004, the applicant proceeded to file his Saman Dalam Kamar (encl. 20) for an order prohibiting the KP JIM from issuing the said certificate of discharge. This application was heard by the learned senior assistant registrar and was dismissed. Upon appeal to the judge in chambers, the applicant's appeal was allowed. The KP JIM was prohibited from issuing the certificate discharging the bankrupt of her bankruptcy for a period of two years from the date the order was made (for ease of reference hereinafter referred to as the "prohibitory order") ie, 8 November 2005 (see order as per encl. 41). This prohibition is to expire on 7 November 2007.

[5] On account of the same, the applicant filed the present Saman Dalam Kamar (encl. 44) on 6 November 2007 to seek an extension of the said prohibitory order (encl. 41) for another two years to end on 7 November 2009, grounded upon the provisions of s. 93(4) of the Act and r. 275 of the Rules . Additionally the applicant also invoked the provision of O. 92 r. 4 of the Rules of the High 1980 (hereinafter referred to as the "RHC") for the removal of doubt as may be necessary to prevent injustice.

[6] In support of the application, it was the contention of the applicant that ever since the judgment debtor was adjudged a bankrupt and even after the prohibitory order (encl. 41) was given, KP JIM 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 73(1)(e) of the Act were also not complied and observed. The bankrupt's statement of affairs and financial position were also not brought to his knowledge and up to date he has yet to receive a single sum from the estate of the bankrupt.

[7] Nevertheless not withstanding the lamentable position of the applicant, in my view the crux of the matter lies singularly over the issue of whether the Court is conferred with the powers to issue an order prohibiting the KP JIM from issuing a certificate of discharge exceeding the period of two years as provided by s. 33B(6)(b) of the Act . I think the answer is in the negative.

[8] The relevant provisions o