[1] On 23 August 2016, this court granted leave to appeal on the following questions:

(i) Where, in a sale and purchase of property, where terms and conditions of the sale and purchase agreement (SPA) have been agreed and a date is fixed for the execution of the SPA, whether any additional deposit paid for the extension of time for completion is equally subject to forfeiture; and

(ii) Whether a purchaser who has agreed and willingly paid an interest in consideration of an extension of time be entitled to claim a refund of the same in the event he defaults in executing the SPA and paying the balance deposit on the due date.

[2] In this judgment unless otherwise stated the parties are referred to as they were at the first instance court, namely the appellant as the defendant and the respondent as the plaintiff. The defendant was the 1st defendant while OCBC Bank (Malaysia) Berhad was the 2nd defendant at the commencement of the trial. The claim against the 2nd defendant was discontinued just before the commencement of the trial at the first instance. The defendant was wound up on 25 July 2011 and liquidators were appointed to manage its affairs. As such, reference to acts of the defenda