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

2006 MarsdenLR 1382

COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYA
PONTIAN UNITED THEATRE SDN BHD – Appellant
Versus
SOUTHERN FINANCE BERHAD – Respondent


Petitioner Advocates:Mathews George ,Respondent Advocate: Wong Kim Fatt,Nadiah Hanim Ishak

JUDGMENT

Abdul Aziz Mohamad JCA:

[1] This appeal is against a winding-up order made by the High Court against the appellant company. The winding up was sought on the ground that the appellants were unable to pay their debts for having neglected to settle a statutory demand served on them on 13 March 2004, by the respondents under s 218(2)(a) of the Companies Act 1965. The sum demanded was RM4,288,727.52 as at 15 September 2000, being, according to the petition, the amount of a final judgment obtained by the respondents on 22 August 2003. That was the date on which was dismissed the appellant's appeal to the Judicial Commissioner (as judge in chambers) against a summary judgment for that sum given by the senior assistant registrar on the respondents' application dated 12 April 2001. The appellants opposed the petition by filing an affidavit in opposition. The respondents did not reply to that affidavit. The appellants' opposition was on four grounds, on all of which the appellants failed in the High Court. The same four grounds have been raised in this appeal.

First Ground

4

[2] For the first ground the appellants rely on the fact that their appeal against the judgment of the High Court

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