JUDGMENT

Abdul Hamid Mohamad JCA:

The appellant (the plaintiff in the High Court) is the company that manages the Regency Hotel and Resort at Port Dickson, belonging to the respondent (the defendant in the High Court). A management agreement was entered by the parties on 15 September 1991. It was to last for ten years. The appellant would be paid 5% of the total annual revenue. Under the agreement the appellant was to have uninterrupted control and operation of the hotel and the respondent agreed not to interfere with the day to day running of the hotel.

On 5 December 2001, the appellant filed a suit (S5-22-1254 of 2001) from which this appeal arises. In the suit, the appellant alleges that the respondent had failed and/or neglected to pay the appellant its management fees from October 1995 amounting to RM348,582.43 as at 31 December 1996. The appellant also alleges that the respondent had wrongfully and unlawfully terminated the management agreement. There is also another suit filed in Kuala Lumpur High Court No. D2-22-67-96 between the parties which is still pending.

On 6 December 2001, the appellant filed an ex partesummons in chambers praying for the following orders:

1. The Defendant whether by its agents, servants, officers or howsoever, be restrained from interfering with or obstructing or hampering the Plaintiffs continued management and operation of The Regency Hotel and Resort, Port Dickson ("the Hotel").

2. The Defendant within 2 days of service of this order, whether by its agents, servants, officers or howsoever, including by way of signing cheques or issuing instructions, do all things as may be necessary to pay, authorise, or ensure payment of wages, allowances or contractual dues owing to or arising in respect of all persons working at the Hotel for the period November 2001 as specified in SCHEDULE A herein out of the funds generated by the operations of the Hotel including funds in Bumiputra Commerce Bank Account No. 05080007490051 and The Standard Chartered Bank Account No. 836144611102 ("the accounts"), and for subsequent months to pay, authorise or ensure payment from the funds as aforesaid in accordance with such lists of staff or employees as may be submitted by the Plaintiff to the Defendant within 7 days of receipt of such submission;

3. The Defendant within 2 days of service of this order, whether by agents, servants, officers or howsoever, do all things as may be necessary to pay, authorise or ensure payment of outstanding amounts due to suppliers and creditors as specified in SCHEDULE B herein, out of the funds generated by the operations of the Hotel including funds in the accounts and to hereafter pay, authorise or ensure payment from the funds as aforesaid in accordance with such lists of creditors and suppliers as may be periodically submitted to the Defendant by the Plaintiff within 7 days of receipt of such submission;

4. The parties be at liberty to apply;

5. A date to be fixed for the inter parteshearing of this application;

6. That provision may be made for the costs of this application; and

7. Such further or other relief which this Honourable Court deems fit.

The learned judge heard the application (encl. 4) on 6 December 2001 and granted prayers (1), (2), (3) and (4). The learned judge also fixed the inter parteshearing on 24 December 2001.

On 24 December 2001, the inter parteshearing of encl. 4 was adjourned to 26 December 2001.

On 26 December 2001, learned counsel for the appellant, sought an adjournment because he had only been served with an affidavit by the respondent that very same morning and suggested that the inter parteshearing be fixed in the first week of January 2002. The learned counsel also prayed that in the interim period the ex parteinjunction that was granted on 6 December 2001 be extended. There was an argument whether the ex parteorder would expire on 26 December 2001 or 27 December 2001. That depends on when the computation of the 21 days is to begin, that is, whethe