Abdul Malik Ishak J:

[1] By an ex parte summons-in-chambers in encl 6, the plaintiffs sought for the following prayers:

(1) An Injunction be issued against the 1st Defendant, 2nd Defendant and 4th Defendant to restrain each of them, whether by themselves, or by their directors, employees, agents or servants or otherwise howsoever, from doing or in any manner whatsoever from carrying out the following acts:

(a) manufacturing, exporting, selling or offering for sale cosmetic sponge products similar to and/or closely resembling the 1st plaintiffs cosmetic sponge products and/or the 3rd Defendants products, until further order of this honourable court;

(b) removing from the jurisdiction of this honourable court, dissipating or dealing with in any manner whatsoever, the assets of the 4th Defendant situate within the jurisdiction of this honourable court, including but not limited to monies in the bank account or accounts of the 4th Defendant, until further Order of this honourable court;

(2) No Bank shall be prevented by an Order of this honourable court from exercising any rights of set-off which it may have acquired prior to the date of the Order;

(3) The 1st defendant and the 2nd Defendant, whether by themselves or by their agents or employees, to surrender to the 2nd Plaintiff or its lawful representatives for preservation until trial or further Order of this honourable court, all account books, bank statements from 1990 to 1996, ledgers, cash books, and other financial documents of the 3rd Defendant Supertex Industries Sdn Bhd AND to allow the 2nd Plaintiff and its representatives to examine, to take photographs and/or to make photocopies of the documents mentioned above;

(4) The 1st Defendant, 2nd Defendant and 4th Defendant, whether by themselves, employees, agents or servants or other persons who appear to have control of the premises known as 85L-5, No 1 & 2, Batu 1 1/2, Jalan Tampoi, 81200 Johor Bahru to permit the plaintiffs solicitors and a few others (not exceeding six (6) persons), and other officers of this honourable court (if present) to enter into the premises mentioned above and any part of the said premises, between 8.00 am and 7.00 pm for the following purpose(s):

(a) to examine the documents in the said premises, including those kept in drawers and locked places, and to remove from the said premises, to be kept by the Plaintiffs solicitors, for the purpose of preserving evidence until trial or further order, all documents which originated from or concern the 1st Plaintiff, 2nd Plaintiff, 3rd Defendant and/or their customers;

(b) to take photographs of the machinery, moulds, and work-in-progress and also finished goods which are similar to and/or closely resembling the Plaintiffs and the 3rd Defendants products;

(5) The Plaintiffs be allowed to use the information, documents and photographs obtained pursuant to the Order as evidence against the Defendants;

(6) The Injunction issued as stated in para (1) above shall lapse after a period of two (2) weeks from the date of the Order, if not earlier;

(7) The Plaintiffs application be fixed for hearing inter-partes on the fourteenth (14) day from the date of the ex parte hearing or on such other date which may be fixed by this honourable court;

(8) The costs and incidental expenses of the Plaintiffs application be costs in the cause;

(9) Other relief and Order deemed fit by this honourable court.

[2] After hearing the submissions of Mr Gan Techiong, the learned counsel for the plaintiffs, I granted on 8 January 1997 the prayers in paras (1)(a) and (b), (2), (3), (4) (a) and (b), (5) and (8) of encl 6. The inter partes hearing was then fixed on 21 January 1997. The headnote to the case of Lim Nyook Yin v. Ultratech Sdn Bhd & Anor, [1995] 1 MLJ 498 which was also reported in the All Malaysia Reports vide, bears repetition:

Time is mandatory set out in O 29 r 1 (2B) of the RHC and the court has no power to extend it. Thus, an interim injunction granted ex parte would lapse aft