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

2020 MarsdenLR 222

FEDERAL COURT PUTRAJAYA
MANSION PROPERTIES SDN BHD – Appellant
Versus
SHAM CHIN YEN & ORS – Respondent


Petitioner Advocates:Ghazi Ishak,B Jeyasingam,Khor Wanxin ,Respondent Advocate: Siau Suen Miin

JUDGMENT

Mohd Zawawi Salleh FCJ:

Introduction

[1] This appeal concerns the proper procedure for applications under ss 366 and 368 of the Companies Act 2016 (" CA ").

[2] The appeal arose out of the ex parte applications by the appellant under ss 366 and 368 of the CA in respect of a proposed scheme of arrangement between the company and its creditors. In the applications, the appellant sought orders from the High Court to convene a creditors' meeting, to restrain all proceedings against the appellant and subsequently to approve the compromise or arrangement agreed to by a majority at the creditors' meeting.

[3] The question at the heart of this appeal is whether the applications under ss 366 and 368 of the CA should be made ex parte or inter parte.

Factual Antecedents

[4] The appellant is the developer of a housing project known as D'Mansion, which includes a hotel and a condominium. The respondents are purchasers of the condominium units. The appellant did not deliver vacant possession of the condominium units within the stipulated time. The construction of the hotel had not been completed.

[5] Due to the delay in delivering vacant possession, some purchasers filed claims against

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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top