Back
COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYA
MESUNTUNG PROPERTY SDN BHD – Appellant
Versus
KIMLIN HOUSING DEVELOPMENT SDN BHD – Respondent
The provided legal document does not specify the names of the judges presiding over this case.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. appeal against high court's dismissal. (Para 1) |
| 2. right to appeal against court's decision (Para 2) |
| 3. background facts of the case. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 8 , 10 , 11 , 14 , 16) |
| 4. procedures leading to the application. (Para 7 , 12 , 13 , 15) |
| 5. procedural background and compliance with court order (Para 9) |
| 6. legal standard for leave under companies act. (Para 17 , 19 , 20 , 21) |
| 7. criteria for granting leave analysis. (Para 22 , 24 , 25 , 26) |
| 8. challenge regarding the imposition of rm100,000. (Para 27 , 28) |
[1] This is an appeal against the decision of the High Court in which the learned judge dismissed an application by the appellant for leave to intervene and commence an action against the respondent under s 226(3) Companies Act 1965 .
[2] We heard the appeal and after due consideration to respective submissions of counsel, we allowed the appeal and now give our reasons.
Background Facts
[3] The respondent was wound up on 27 February 1989 and pursuant to an acquisition agreement dated 6 May 1999, Danaharta Urus Sdn Bhd (Danaharta) acquired the rights, title and interest of Bumiputra-Commerce Bank Berhad (BCCB) in the security documents relating to the credit facili
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
