Banks as Garnishees - Banks are commonly involved as garnishees in proceedings to satisfy a judgment debt, where they are ordered to pay the judgment creditor the amount due or accruing due from the judgment debtor. This is based on the authority to attach debts owed to the debtor (e.g., O 49 of the Rules of 2012)
SENG SAN BING vs PETER CHARLES SMERLING; AFFIN BANK BERHAD & ORS (GARNISHEE) (ENCL 77) - High Court Malaya Shah Alam
,SK MAJUMAS SDN BHD vs MUHAMMAD ALIF JALIL; PUBLIC BANK BERHAD & ORS (GARNISHEES) - Magistrate Court Selama
,ANANDA KUMAR KRISHNAN vs TESCO STORES (MALAYSIA) SDN BHD - Court of Appeal Putrajaya
,PAX INVESTMENTS LIMITED vs STANDARD CHARTERED BANK MALAYSIA BERHAD - High Court Malaya Kuala Lumpur
.Nature of Garnishee Proceedings - These proceedings are tripartite, involving the judgment creditor, judgment debtor, and garnishee (bank). The process begins with an order nisi, and if the garnishee does not dispute the debt, the court may grant an order absolute for payment
SENG SAN BING vs PETER CHARLES SMERLING; AFFIN BANK BERHAD & ORS (GARNISHEE) (ENCL 77) - High Court Malaya Shah Alam
,SK MAJUMAS SDN BHD vs MUHAMMAD ALIF JALIL; PUBLIC BANK BERHAD & ORS (GARNISHEES) - Magistrate Court Selama
,ANANDA KUMAR KRISHNAN vs TESCO STORES (MALAYSIA) SDN BHD - Court of Appeal Putrajaya
.Banks' Knowledge and Defense - Banks are generally aware of garnishee orders and proceedings but may lack knowledge of subsequent distribution proceedings or specific orders directing the distribution of funds among multiple creditors. They are entitled to rely on the garnishee order, and payment made in accordance with an order absolute discharges their liability, even if proceedings are later set aside
Punjab National Bank and 8 others vs M/s.IL and FS Financial Services Limited and 4 others - Madras
, 2022 Supreme(Online)(MAD) 25630,PAX INVESTMENTS LIMITED vs STANDARD CHARTERED BANK MALAYSIA BERHAD - High Court Malaya Kuala Lumpur
.Legal Principles and Limitations - A creditor can only attach property that the debtor could deal with properly, respecting other persons' rights. If the debtor is contractually unable to access certain funds, garnishee proceedings cannot compel access to those funds
PAX INVESTMENTS LIMITED vs STANDARD CHARTERED BANK MALAYSIA BERHAD - High Court Malaya Kuala Lumpur
,JAYAWEERA v. ABDUL CADER
.Effect of Garnishee Orders - Payment by the garnishee in compliance with an order absolute is a valid discharge of liability, regardless of subsequent proceedings that may set aside the garnishee order
SENG SAN BING vs PETER CHARLES SMERLING; AFFIN BANK BERHAD & ORS (GARNISHEE) (ENCL 77) - High Court Malaya Shah Alam
,JAYAWEERA v. ABDUL CADER
.Procedural Aspects and Remedies - Failure to apply for a stay of proceedings pending appeal is an oversight; courts may consider such relief if special circumstances exist. Garnishee proceedings can be resisted or contested, but if the garnishee does not dispute the debt, the court may proceed to grant the order absolute
SK MAJUMAS SDN BHD vs MUHAMMAD ALIF JALIL; PUBLIC BANK BERHAD & ORS (GARNISHEES) - Magistrate Court Selama
,NADRAH AYUNI MOHD YUSOP vs RAHMAN LAPODIN; RHB BANK BERHAD/RHB ISLAMIC BERHAD & ORS (GARNISHEES) - High Court Sabah & Sarawak Sandakan
,ANANDA KUMAR KRISHNAN vs TESCO STORES (MALAYSIA) SDN BHD - Court of Appeal Putrajaya
.
Analysis and Conclusion:Banks are considered garnishees and are liable to pay debts owed to the judgment debtor upon receipt of a garnishee order. Their knowledge of proceedings does not preclude their liability, and payment in accordance with an order absolves them of further liability, even if proceedings are later challenged or set aside. However, garnishee proceedings are limited to debts the debtor can lawfully access, and the process involves careful procedural steps, including the possibility of resisting or disputing the debt. Ultimately, banks act as debtors in garnishee proceedings, with their role being to comply with lawful orders while respecting the rights of other parties involved.