[1] This is my judgment in respect of the defendant's application seeking for my recusal not on the grounds of any form of nexus directly or indirectly with the parties to the suit, but solely on the grounds that: (i) I have not allowed a winding-up petition against Comsa Properties Sdn Bhd (which has nexus to the plaintiff) for an indebted sum; and (ii) in that judgment I have concluded that the petition was oppressive and vindictive, tantamount to an abuse of process of court, and the application was filed with the view to paralyse Comsa Properties Sdn Bhd. The judgment has been published and reported as Malaysian Assurance Alliance Berhad v. Comsa Properties Sdn Bhd .

[2] When the matter came up for case management on 27 March 2012, the defendant's junior advocate, Mr Vijay Raj, informed the court that they have filed an application for my recusal, and wanted to stay proceedings until the hearing and disposal of an application which had not been sealed and served. I informed the defendant that in the present "fast track system", matters have to be justly, expeditiously and economically be dealt with. Pursuant to O 34 of the Rules of the High 1980, I su