Ahmad Shahrir J:

[1]For purposes of this judgment, the parties are referred to in their respective capacities in the main action.

[2]This was an application filed by the defendant, Ng Geock Sin, for the appointment of independent joint administrators pendente lite to preserve and manage the deceased’s estate pending the determination of the main suit for letters of administration. The suit is in relation to the administration of the estate of the late Lim Kim Seng who passed away intestate in April 2021. The defendant is the mother of the deceased and grandmother of the plaintiffs.

[3]Subsequent to this application in encl 5, the plaintiffs filed a similar application in encl 94. In encl 94, the plaintiffs instead sought to appoint the first and second plaintiffs themselves as the joint administrator pendente lite. Both encls 5 and 94 were heard together by agreement of the parties.

[4]The main dispute was between the plaintiffs who sought for the appointment of the first plaintiff as sole administrator and the defendant who opposed it. Having perused the application and considered the respective position of the parties as deliberated in the submissions, I allowed the defendant’s application in encl 5 for the appointment of joint administrators pendente lite.

[5]Since encl 5 was allowed, encl 94 was consequently dismissed.

[6]The plaintiffs were not satisfied with the decision and appealed.

[7]The deceased, Lim Kim Seng, passed away intestate in April 2021 leaving behind an estate conservatively valued at over RM20m. The estate comprises real properties including residential and commercial units, gold and silver bars, bank accounts, and a substantial debt allegedly owed by Dergahayu Sdn Bhd.

[8]In September 2022, the plaintiffs filed the present suit seeking the appointment of the first plaintiff as sole administrator of the estate. This followed an earlier application by the first plaintiff in Originating Summons No WA-31NCvC-2937–12 of 2021.

[9]In October 2022, the defendant filed this application (encl 5) seeking the appointment of Lim Tian Huat and Chiang Teng Guan as the joint administrators pendente lite pending determination of the main suit. Both the nominees are chartered accountants with extensive experience in estate administration.

[10]The plaintiffs raised several objections to the appointment of the joint administrators pendente lite. In crux, their main contentions were as follows:

(a)there was no necessity for such appointment as there were no urgent debts requiring immediate attention;

(b)the proposed administrators were in a position of conflict of interest;

(c)the defendant’s affidavits were defective due to improper jurat; and

(d)the first plaintiff was already managing the estate affairs.

[11]On the question of necessity, the court’s power to appoint an administrator pendente lite stems from s 19 of the Probate and Administration Act 1959 and O 72 r 20 of the Rules of Court 2012.

Section 19 of the Probate and Administration Act 1959 reads as follows:

19 Letters of administration pendente lite

Pending any probate action, letters of administration may be granted to such person as the Court may appoint, limited so that the administrator shall not be empowered to distribute the estate, and shall be subject to such control by, and direction of, the Court, as the Court deems fit; and subject to that limitation the administrator so appointed shall have all the rights and powers of a general administrator.

Order 72 r 20 of the Rules of Court 2012 provides as follows:

20 Administration pending trial (O 72 r 20)

(1) An application under section 19 of the Probate and Administration Act 1959 for the grant of administration may be made to the Registrar by writ.

(2) An administrator to whom a grant is made under section 19 of the Act must, at the time when he begins proceedings for taxation of his costs, or at such other time as the Registrar may direct, produce at the Registry an accoun