JUDGMENT

Vide an agreement dated July 26, 1995 the plaintiff had offered two banking facilities to the defendant, namely, a term loan of RM 23, 500,000 and a bridging loan of RM 36, 500,00 (hereinafter referred to as the facilities). As security, pursuant to another agreement dated November 12, 1995, the defendant had charged a couple of immoveable properties (hereinafter referred to as the impugned properties) for the above facilities. As a consequence of its failure to service the facilities, the plaintiff had thereupon filed and served an originating summons against the defendant, praying for

1

vacant possession of the impugned properties, and an order for their sale pursuant to Order 83 of the Rules of the High Court 1980. The plaintiff was successful and the court had meted out the order on January 7, 2002 as provided for under section 256 of the National Land Code 1965.

Being dissatisfied with my order of vacant possession and sale, the defendant had filed a notice of appeal to the Court of Appeal. Vide summons in chambers dated October 10, 2002 the defendant had filed for a stay of execution order, pending the appeal at the said appeal court The following grounds were ventil