The court ruled that the defendant's silence and partial payments constituted an admission of the claim, emphasizing that late objections do not fulfill the requirement for establishing triable issues in a summary judgment application.

A. Introduction

[1] This is the Plaintiffs application for a Summary Judgment pursuant to O 14 r 1 of the Rules of Court 2012 filed via encl 5 of this Writ Summons by the Plaintiff.

[2] Essentially, this suit has been filed by the Plaintiff for the sum of RM3,362,146.13 being the outstanding payments for work done by the Plaintiff against the Defendant pursuant to a Purchase Order and Letter of Award both dated 8 March 2022 and the Plaintiff's letter dated 10 March 2022 (collectively referred to as "the contract") entered into by the Plaintiff and the Defendant.

[3] Upon considering all the cause papers and the parties' submissions in relation to this application, I allowed the Plaintiff's application with costs against the Defendant. The Defendant being dissatisfied with my decision has filed a Memorandum of Appeal to the Court of Appeal against my decision and as such, I write my Grounds of Judgment on my decision.

B. Brief Background

[4] The Defendant engaged the Plaintiff via the contract as a contractor for a project known as:

"Architerual And Interior Works For Proposed 8 Screen Multiplex Cinemas At Level 2 To Level 4 Of Gamuda Quayside Mall, 42500 Telok Panglima Garang For Mbo Cinema Sdn Bhd"

(hereinafter referred to as "the Project")

[5] The contract was awarded for a sum of RM5,846,240.00 ("original contract sum"), which was subsequently increased to RM6,047,102.31 ("new contract sum") inclusive of variation works in the sum of RM200,862.31.

[6] The project commenced on 4 March 2022 and the contract period was for 19 months which ended on 15 July 2022. The Project Architect via letter dated 28 June 2022 to the Plaintiff issued the Certificate of Practical Completion ("CPC") and confirmed that the Defects Liability Period ("DLP") of 18 months was due to end on 27 December 2023. Through the same letter, the Project Architect also confirmed the following:

"The Works were completed to our satisfaction and taken into possession on: 28 June 2022"

[7] The Plaintiff, having discharged its duties and obligations under the contract in full, proceeded to issue Progress Claims Nos 1 to 5 for a total sum of RM6,047,102.31, all of which had been certified by the Project Architect. In this regard, the Plaintiff issued the following invoices for said sum of RM6,047,102.31 to the Defendant:-

[8] The Defendant did not at that material time or any other time prior to this suit being filed object to the Plaintiffs Progress Claims Nos 1 to 5, the Project Architect's certifications, and the Plaintiff's invoices for said Progress Claims Nos 1 to 5. In this regard, the Defendant is deemed to have admitted to owing the sum of RM6,047,102.31 to the Plaintiff.

[9] There is an instalment payment schedule dated 28 October 2022 ("instalment payment schedule") between the parties confirming the sum owed to be RM3,946,212.00, following which the Defendant had paid a sum of RM708,335.66 as part payment.

[10] The Defendant has undisputedly made part payments in the total sum of RM2,662,207.66 ("part payments"). Taking into consideration the part payments made by the Defendant together with the credit notes issued by the Plaintiff in the total sum of RM22.748.52, there is an undisputed sum of RM3,362,146.13 remaining due and payable by the Defendant to the Plaintiff.

[11] The breakdown of the sum owed to the Plaintiff by the Defendant is shown as foll