JUDGMENT

Abdul Hamid Mohamed JC:

[1] Learned Counsel for the judgment debtor applied for a stay of further proceedings pending the determination of the judgment debtor's appeal to the Supreme Court. Learned Counsel for the petitioning creditor objected to the application.

[2] s 97 of the Bankruptcy Act 1967, provides:

The Court may at any time, for sufficient reason, make an order staying the proceedings under a bankruptcy petition, either altogether or for a limited time, on such terms and subject to conditions as the Court thinks just.

[3] r 138 of the Bankruptcy Rules 1969, provides:

There may be included in a receiving order an order staying any action or proceeding against the debtor or staying proceedings generally.

[4] There is no doubt the words "at any time" include an application made after a receiving and adjudication order has been made - see Realisations Industrielles et Commerciales S A v. Loescher and Partners [1957] 1 WLR 1026 and Re Chop Sin Guan Moh & Ors, [1965] 2 MLJ 106.

[5] The question therefore is whether there is sufficient reason.

[6] As I have stated in the main grounds of judgment, a receiving and adjudication order was first made in the previous proceedings on 20 June 1988. The application for a stay of proceedings was refused.

[7] However, on 24 April 1989, the appeal by the judgment debtor was allowed by the Supreme Court which means that the judgment debtor was a bankrupt for about 10 months, until his appeal was finally determined in his favour.

[8] In this proceeding, some serious points of law have been raised. I have also expressed my doubts about the correctness of the decision of the Federal Court in Soh Bok Yew v. Cinder Dvpt. Sdn Bhd, [1977] 1 MLJ 242 which is binding on me. All these points will, no doubt, be decided by the Supreme Court when the appeal is heard.

[9] In the circumstances, I am of the view that there are sufficient reasons for me to exercise my discretion to stay further proceedings until the appeal is heard and determined.