Hashim Yeop Sani FJ:

This was an appeal against the ruling of the learned Judge that based on an undertaking executed by the appellant (CBK7) the respondent bank was not precluded from recommencing bankruptcy proceeding against the appellant. At the conclusion of the hearing of the appeal we decided to confine our decision only to the point concerning what proper construction ought to be given to the provision of the said undertaking.

The facts are straightforward and may be summarised as follows. A consent judgment for RM100,244.53 was entered against one Michael C. Solle (the appellant) and two others. A bankruptcy notice was caused to issue by the respondent bank. Thereafter the appellant managed to prevail on the bank to withdraw the bankruptcy proceeding against him upon the appellant delivering to the bank a letter of undertaking as exhibited. The respondent bank later caused another bankruptcy notice to issue in another proceeding purporting to rely on the failure to comply with the undertaking. That proceeding resulted in the present appeal.

The appellant's contention was that the arrangement in the terms of the letter of undertaking was that he was to make a down