Abdul Malik Ishak J:

This was an appeal by Arab Malaysian Finance Berhad, the judgment creditor, in encl. 38 against the decision of the Senior Assistant Registrar ("SAR") who on 6 March 1998 ordered that the judgment creditor's petition dated 18 Febraury 1997 filed by the judgment creditor and before it was served on Wong Chong Siong, the judgment debtor, be struck out.The SAR too ordered the forfeiture of the deposit in the sum of RM2,000 which had been deposited by the judgment creditor to the Official Assignee ("OA").

It is pertinent to point out that the judgment creditor had acted expeditiously for they filed the notice of appeal to the judge-in-chambers in encl. 38 on 30 July 1998 within two days from the date when the sealed Order as reflected in encl. 38 was returned to the judgment creditor's solicitors by the court on 28 July 1998.Now, an appeal to the judge-in-chambers, like encl. 38, shall lie from any judgment, order or decision of the SAR and the time frame of such an appeal according to O. 56 r. 1(3) of the Rules of the High 1980 ("RHC") would be as follows:

Unless the court otherwise order, the notice must be issued within 5 days after the judgment, order or decision appealed against was given or made and served not less than 2 clear days before the day fixed for hearing the appeal.

But the appeal to the judge-in-chambers in encl. 38 related to a special provision namely the Bankruptcy Rules 1969 and of significance would be r. 89(b) thereof which stipulates that:

The provisions and procedure for the time being in force respecting appeals from the High court in its ordinary civil jurisdiction shall apply to appeals in bankruptcy with the following modifications:

(a) ...

(b) The time for entering the appeal and serving notice thereof on the respondent shall be fourteen days from the date of the signing, entering or otherwise perfecting the judgment or order appealed from;

(c) ...

That the judgment creditor had complied fully with r. 89(b) of the Bankruptcy Rules 1969 can never be doubted.In my judgment, for the purpose of computing time for filing the appeal in encl. 38 the judgment creditor must adhere to r. 89(b) of the Bankruptcy Rules 1969 and not O. 56 r. 1(3) of the RHC. I am fortified in my view by the judgment of Buhagiar J in Chan Tai Tai & Anor. V. Official Assignee, Fm [1956] 1 MLRH 49, [1957] 1 MLJ 54 where his Lordship said in the context of r. 88(b) of the Bankruptcy Rules 1921 which is equivalent to the present r. 89(b) of the Bankruptcy Rules 1969:

On behalf of the applicant it was submitted that there is a conflict between Rule 88 (b) of the Bankruptcy Rules 1921, and Rule 11 of the court of Appeal Rules and that in view of the provisions of section 10(2) of the Rule Committee Ordinance, 1948, under which the court of Appeal Rules were made, the provisions of those Rules should prevail.

In the opinion of this court there is no conflict between the court of Appeal Rules and Bankruptcy Rules, 1921; Rule 88 of the last mentioned Rules contains general and special provisions; after laying down that the provisions and procedure for the time being in force respecting appeals from the Supreme court in its ordinary civil jurisdiction shall apply to appeals in bankruptcy, that Rule goes on to make certain modifications, one of which is that in appeals in bankruptcy the time for entering the appeal and serving notice thereof on the respondent is to be fourteen days from the date of signing, entering or otherwise perfecting the judgment or order appealed from instead of one month.

It is an established principle that unless it is specifically so provided by law, a general provision does not impliedly override a special provision.