JUDGMENT

Peh Swee Chin J:

I have earlier dismissed the appeals of the 1st defendant, (the Company), and the 3rd defendant, (the Guarantor), respectively from a decision of the learned Registrar granting leave to enter final judgment against them in favour of the plaintiff, (the Bank), on an O. 14 application for summary judgment. I now give my reasons.

The Bank has earlier sued the Company for RM6,460,603.74 with interest and costs due on a banking account in respect of which the Bank had granted an overdraft facility. Although this action is not a foreclosure summons, it will be pertinent to point out that the money so lent and so owing was also secured by a charge over certain land of the Company, in addition to its being secured also by a letter of guarantee signed by the Guarantor in favour of the Bank and concerned herein. In this action, therefore the Bank has sued the Company on a covenant to pay money so lent and so owing, and the Guarantor on her guarantee to pay the same.

Before me on appeal, learned Counsel for the Company submitted implicitly on the basis, that the said charge executed by the Company was an English mortgage at common law or a transaction exactly like su