SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2008 MarsdenLR 3666 ; 2008 MarsdenLR 1

ROHANA YUSUF
DANAHARTA MANAGERS SDN BHD – Appellant
Versus
MELEWAR LEISURE SDN BHD & 2 ORS – Respondent


GROUNDS OF DECISION

The application by the plaintiff in enclosure 25 was made under O. 14A of the Rules of the High Court, 1980 (RHC). Essentially enclosure 25 requires the court to determine the validity of the agreements between parties for want of consideration; the validity of the interest charges; and the conclusiveness of the Certificate of Indebtedness. Upon the determination of all these issues in favour of the plaintiff the court may enter judgments against all the defendants upon the terms stated in the said enclosure 25.

Brief facts

1. Sime Bank Bhd (SBB) granted four loan facilities to four companies namely; BistroAmericana (M) Sdn. Bhd (BAM), BistroAmericana (PJ) Sdn. Bhd (BAPJ), BistroAmericana (SJ) Sdn. Bhd. (BASJ) and BistroAmericana (JB) Sdn Bhd (BAJB). All these four borrowers shall hereafter be referred to collectively as the "Initial Borrowers".

2. All the four loan facilities were secured by a corporate guarantee of Melewar Leisure Sdn Bhd (the first defendant) and the personal guarantees each by Tunku Abdullah Ibni Almarhum Tunku Abdul Rahman (the second defendant) and Tunku Iskandar bin Tunku Abdullah (the third defendant)The Initial Borrowers defaulted in th

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top