Back
HIGH COURT MALAYA GEORGETOWN
PUBLIC BANK BERHAD – Appellant
Versus
GOH GIAP PING & ORS – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. recovery action for amounts due to the bank. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. banking facilities details and agreements. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. details of borrower's default and demand. (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 4. d2's defense based on alleged forgery. (Para 12 , 30 , 31) |
| 5. d2 admits liability for loan facilities 1 to 5. (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 24) |
| 6. bank's rights to recover without first exhausting other remedies. (Para 25 , 27 , 28) |
| 7. burden of proof lies on d2 to show forgery. (Para 32 , 36 , 39 , 40) |
| 8. signed documents cannot be proved forged without sufficient evidence. (Para 44 , 46 , 70) |
| 9. failure to call d2's co-director affects d2's credibility. (Para 58 , 59 , 60) |
| 10. judgment entered for the bank against d2. (Para 80 , 81) |
Introduction
[1] This is a recovery action by the plaintiff ("Bank") against the 2nd Defendant ("D2") for the amounts due to the Bank in connection with banking facilities that were granted by the Bank to a borrower. D2 is sued as a guarantor. He had guaranteed the repayment of the banking facilities granted by the Bank to the borrower.
[2] After a full trial, I allow the Bank's claim. Here are the grounds of my judgment.
Backgr
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
