JUDGMENT

(Enclosure 152)

INTRODUCTION

[1] Before the court is the 4th Defendant's application in Enclosure 152 dated 25.4.2025 seeking to strike out certain paragraphs in the Plaintiff's Reply to the 4th Defendant's Defence dated 4.9.2024. Specifically, the 4th Defendant seeks to strike out paragraphs 5(c)(i) to (v), 5(e)(i) to (xxiii), and 5(f)(i) to (xiv) ("the Questioned Paragraphs") pursuant to Order 18, rule 19(1)(b), (c) and/or (d) of the Rules of Court 2012.

[2] The application was heard on 10.7.2025 with oral submissions presented by counsel for both parties.

[3] At the conclusion of the hearing, I reserved judgment. Having considered the affidavits filed, written submissions, oral submissions, and all relevant authorities, on 29.7.2025 I allowed Enclosure 152. These are my full grounds.

BACKGROUND FACTS

[4] The Plaintiff, Ovanti Ventures Sdn Bhd, commenced this action against six defendants arising from two Business Investment Agreements ("BIAs") entered into between the Plaintiff and the 1st Defendant, Anggun Dinamik Holdings International Sdn Bhd.

[5] The first BIA was executed on 6.10.2021 ("BIA1") and the second on 25.4.2022 ("BIA Z). Under these agreements, the Plaintiff claims to have invested a total sum of RM3,500,000.00 with the 1st Defendant. The Plaintiff's claim centres on the specific disbursement of RM2,996,000.00 pursuant to these BIAs.

[6] The 4th Defendant, Edward Tan Tee Tong, was at material times a director of the Plaintiff company. He was also appointed as Group Chief Operating Officer ("GCOO") of the Plaintiff after the 3rd Defendant, Kuan Choon Hsuing (referred to as "Kenneth"), was appointed as Group Chief Financial Officer ("GCFO") of the Plaintiff's holding company, Ovanti Limited (formerly known as IOU Pay Ltd).

[7] In the Re-Amended Statement of Claim dated 18.6.2024, the Plaintiff alleges, inter alia, that the 4th Defendant breached fiduciary duties owed to the Plaintiff as a director, that he was involved in a fraudulent scheme to defraud the Plaintiff, and that he conspired with others to injure the Plaintiff by unlawful means. The Plaintiff seeks various reliefs including declarations of breach of fiduciary duties, breach of trust, and damages for conspiracy.

[8] The 4th Defendant filed his Defence dated 7.8.2024 wherein he specifically pleaded in paragraphs 5(a) to (d) that: (a) his appointment as director was made by the Plaintiff's holding company through Kenneth; (b) he reported to and took instructions from Kenneth at all material times; (c) notwithstanding his appointment as director, he had no real powers or influence over the financial management and/or investment of the company except as directed by the Plaintiff and/or Kenneth; and (d) he was wrongfully terminated by the company.

[9] The Plaintiff then filed a Reply to the 4th Defendant's Defence dated 4.9.2024. The Questioned Paragraphs, which span some 23 pages, contain allegations relating to four distinct matters: (i) transactions involving Messrs Sidek Teoh Wong & Dennis ("STWD"), which are the subject of a separate suit, namely High Court Suit No. WA-22NCC-137-03/2023 ("Suit 137); (ii) a purported joint venture between N.S. Au Mining Sdn Bhd ("NSAM) and S.E.R.E.M. Malaysia Sdn Bhd ("SEREM); (iii) a joint venture ("Akay-Piminik JV) between Akay Holdings Sdn Bhd ("Akay") and Piminik Capital Sdn Bhd (Piminik), which matters are the subject of another separate suit, namely High Court Suit No. WA-22NCC-292-05/2024 ("Suit 292 '); and (iv) a Business Investment Agreement with Teppanyaki Properties Sdn Bhd ("Teppanyaki BIA").

[10] Significantly, some of these transactions, particularly those involving the NSAM-SEREM joint venture and Akay-Piminik JV, involve funds disbursed from iSentric Sdn Bhd ("iSentric"), a company which is not a party to the present action.

[11] On 25.4.2025, the 4th Defendant filed the present application to strike out the Questioned Paragraphs. The 4th Defendant relied on an earlier decision of this court in Suit 137,