Back
2018 MarsdenLR 3712
HIGH COURT SABAH & SARAWAK SANDAKAN
SYARIKAT YONG THAI – Appellant
Versus
ZUNG ZANG HOLDINGS SDN BHD – Respondent
[Companies (Winding-Up) No: SDK-28NCC-3-12-2014]
The court has discretion in appointing liquidators, prioritizing the views of creditors and ensuring efficiency in the winding-up process.
Headnote:This judgment addresses the applications from the petitioner regarding the appointment of a liquidator under the Companies (Winding-Up) Rules 1972. The court analyzed the statutory provisions and confirmed that Lim San Peen’s appointment serves the interests of the creditors. The court found no valid grounds were presented by the intervener for objection. Key issues included the discretion of the court in appointing liquidators and the views of creditors. The court concluded that the private liquidator’s appointment is appropriate, allowing the petitioner's applications.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. court's authority to appoint liquidators. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
[1] On the applications of Syarikat Yong Thai (the petitioner), Zung Zang Plantations Sdn Bhd (Company No 338671-V) (ZZPSB) and Granright Enterprise Sdn Bhd (Company No 371245-W) (GESB) were wound up by the court on 15 January 2016 with the Official Receiver (OR) appointed as the liquidator of the ZZPSB and GESB.
[2] On 1 March 2016, the petitioner filed two applications (encls 52 and 55) for the following orders:
i) that one Lim San Peen (IC No 580910-03-5477) to be appointed as liquidator of the winding-up company in place of the Official Receiver;
ii) that the liquidator be allowed to distribute any surplus assets of the company to its contributors pursuant to r 102 of the Companies (Winding-Up) Rules 1972;
iii) that the liquidator's remuneration/fees be approved in accordance with the statutory fees as prescribed in Table C of the Second Schedule to the Companies (Winding-Up) Rules 1972 pursuant to r 195;
iv) that the liquidator be given leave to bill his remuneration periodically and to remunerate himself periodically from the assets of the company;
v) that the costs of this application be paid out of the assets of the company; and
vi) any further or other relief as the Honourable court may deem fit or proper to grant.
[3] The grounds of the two applications are stated in the affidavit of Lim Man Kwong (encls 53 and 56).
