Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Scanned Judgements…!
Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Scanned Judgements…!
No source specifies s.540 CA (1965/2016), but general rule mandates originating summons for non-excepted CA applications (e.g., not winding up/capital reduction), per O.88 r.2 (CA 1965)/Appendix C (CA 2016) and O.5 r.3 ROC; writ only if factual disputes necessitate conversion. [](https://supremetoday.ai/doc/judgement/MY_MLRH_1998_7_MLRH_689) ["IN THE MATTER OF AUSTRAL AMALGAMATED BHD vs ."] ["NG CHOONG WEI vs KCK DAFU CONGEE SDN BHD & ORS - High Court"] ["FAZARUDIN SUJAIRI MD RADZI vs BADAN PENGURUSAN BERSAMA PANGSAPURI CASMARIA - High Court"]
In the complex world of corporate litigation in Malaysia, choosing the correct mode to commence proceedings can make or break a case. A common query arises: for matters under Section 540 of the Companies Act 1965, should you file an originating summons (OS) or a writ? This question is pivotal, as selecting the wrong method may lead to procedural challenges or dismissal. While no document directly addresses Section 540, general principles under the Rules of the High Court 1980 (RHC) provide clear guidance. This post breaks down the rules, exceptions, and best practices—remember, this is general information, not specific legal advice. Consult a qualified lawyer for your situation.
Section 540 typically deals with court powers in company windings-up or investigations, though specifics aren't detailed here. The key issue is the mode of commencement: OS for straightforward applications or writ for disputed facts? Understanding this requires examining Orders 5 and 88 of the RHC, which govern civil proceedings and Companies Act applications. LOH ENG LEONG & 2 ORS vs LOH MU SEN & SONS (SDN) BERHAD & 3 ORS - 2008 MarsdenLR 1343LOH ENG LEONG & 2 ORS vs LOH MU SEN & SONS (SDN) BERHAD & 3 ORS - 2008 MarsdenLR 4015
Under Order 5 Rule 1 RHC, civil proceedings generally begin by writ or originating summons, except as provided otherwise. MOHAMMED SHAIPUDIN ABDUL BASIR LWN. YANG BERBAHAGIA DATO HAJI MOHD FAUZI HAJI YATIM DATUK BANDAR MA.... - 2025 MarsdenLR 2180
Originating summons originated as a simplified Chancery procedure for non-contentious matters, substituting summons for writs in chambers. Charu K. Mehta VS Lilavati Kirtilal Mehta Medical Trust - 2012 Supreme(Bom) 2122
Order 88 Rule 2(1) is decisive: Unless otherwise provided in the Act, and except in rr 3,4, and 5, every application under the Act must in accordance with O 5, r 3, be made by originating summons. LOH ENG LEONG & 2 ORS vs LOH MU SEN & SONS (SDN) BERHAD & 3 ORS - 2008 MarsdenLR 1343LOH ENG LEONG & 2 ORS vs LOH MU SEN & SONS (SDN) BERHAD & 3 ORS - 2008 MarsdenLR 4015
This presumptive rule applies to Sections like 540, absent exceptions. For instance:- Section 162 (rectification of register): Allows OS or originating motion—no writ mentioned. LOH ENG LEONG & 2 ORS vs LOH MU SEN & SONS (SDN) BERHAD & 3 ORS - 2008 MarsdenLR 1343- Section 181 (oppression): Sometimes uses petition, indicating section-specific variations. PAN-PACIFIC CONSTRUCTION HOLDINGS SDN BHD vs NGIU-KEE CORPORATION (M) BHD & ANOR - 2010 MarsdenLR 454
No sources contradict OS for unspecified sections like 540. Thus, OS is the default for pure applications or document construction without factual disputes. CEKAL BERJASA SDN BHD vs TENAGA NASIONAL BHD - 2006 MarsdenLR 337CEKAL BERJASA SDN BHD vs TENAGA NASIONAL BHD - 2006 MarsdenLR 3338
OS is a summary procedure for simple issues of construction or interpretation, avoiding full trials. Courts have discretion to refuse if facts are complex or contentious. Charu K. Mehta VS Lilavati Kirtilal Mehta Medical Trust - 2012 Supreme(Bom) 2122
From comparative insights:- Bombay High Court Rules emphasize OS for straightforward issues of construction, but relegate factual complexities to ordinary suits. If unsuitable, courts may dismiss and direct a writ. Charu K. Mehta VS Lilavati Kirtilal Mehta Medical Trust - 2012 Supreme(Bom) 2122- In trust deeds, OS suits non-contentious interpretations but fails where mixed facts/law require evidence or where parallel proceedings exist (e.g., suppression of material facts breaches uberrima fides). Samitendra Narayan Dutta VS Purnendra Narayan Dutta - 2001 Supreme(Cal) 254- Customary practices, like trustee appointments, can be resolved via OS if evidence isn't overly complex. Homi P. Ranina and others VS Eruch B. Desai and others - 1995 Supreme(Bom) 125
These principles align with Malaysian RHC: OS thrives on affidavits, not oral testimony, unless ordered. LAU CHOON YEUB (F) & ANOR vs MAK CHOW YON @ HA CHAI & ORS - 2025 MarsdenLR 1764
Switch to writ if:- Substantial factual disputes arise (O.5 r.2)—e.g., contested events needing cross-examination. MOHAMMED SHAIPUDIN ABDUL BASIR LWN. YANG BERBAHAGIA DATO HAJI MOHD FAUZI HAJI YATIM DATUK BANDAR MA.... - 2025 MarsdenLR 2180- Specific O.88 exceptions (rr.3-5) apply, like petitions for oppression. LOH ENG LEONG & 2 ORS vs LOH MU SEN & SONS (SDN) BERHAD & 3 ORS - 2008 MarsdenLR 1343
Proceedings in which a substantial dispute of fact is likely to arise shall be begun by writ. LAU CHOON YEUB (F) & ANOR vs MAK CHOW YON @ HA CHAI & ORS - 2025 MarsdenLR 1764LAU CHOON YEUB (F) & ANOR vs MAK CHOW YON @ HA CHAI & ORS - 2025 MarsdenLR 3072
In company service contexts, proper summons delivery (e.g., at registered office per Companies Act s.51) is crucial, overriding general CPC rules—failure invalidates proceedings. Harendra Nath Ghosal VS Superfoam Pvt. Ltd. - 1991 Supreme(Cal) 136
One case noted: Originating motion invalid if not authorized—defaults to OS or writ. KANCILTEK (M) SDN BHD vs MAYBAN FINANCE BHD
For s.540:1. Default to OS if seeking court application under the Act without factual fights—file with affidavit on legal points.2. Use writ for disputed facts.3. Verify O.88 exceptions; consider originating motion if akin to s.162.4. Ensure service at registered office. Harendra Nath Ghosal VS Superfoam Pvt. Ltd. - 1991 Supreme(Cal) 1365. Disclose all material facts to avoid dismissal. Samitendra Narayan Dutta VS Purnendra Narayan Dutta - 2001 Supreme(Cal) 254
Strict compliance is key—no flexible validation.
| Mode | When to Use | Examples ||------|-------------|----------|| Originating Summons | Legal construction, undisputed facts, Companies Act apps (O.88 r.2) | s.162 rectification LOH ENG LEONG & 2 ORS vs LOH MU SEN & SONS (SDN) BERHAD & 3 ORS - 2008 MarsdenLR 1343 || Writ | Substantial fact disputes (O.5 r.2) | Contentious company disputes LAU CHOON YEUB (F) & ANOR vs MAK CHOW YON @ HA CHAI & ORS - 2025 MarsdenLR 1764 |
In summary, originating summons is typically the mode for s.540, per general Companies Act rules, unless exceptions or facts dictate otherwise. This streamlines justice for non-adversarial matters, echoing global OS principles. LOH ENG LEONG & 2 ORS vs LOH MU SEN & SONS (SDN) BERHAD & 3 ORS - 2008 MarsdenLR 4015
Disclaimer: This overview draws from cited sources but isn't exhaustive or tailored advice. Laws evolve; always seek professional counsel. For more on Malaysian corporate law, explore our blog.
References:1. LOH ENG LEONG & 2 ORS vs LOH MU SEN & SONS (SDN) BERHAD & 3 ORS - 2008 MarsdenLR 1343 – O.88 core authority.2. LOH ENG LEONG & 2 ORS vs LOH MU SEN & SONS (SDN) BERHAD & 3 ORS - 2008 MarsdenLR 4015 – Reinforces OS mandate.3. MOHAMMED SHAIPUDIN ABDUL BASIR LWN. YANG BERBAHAGIA DATO HAJI MOHD FAUZI HAJI YATIM DATUK BANDAR MA.... - 2025 MarsdenLR 2180 – O.5 rules.4. LAU CHOON YEUB (F) & ANOR vs MAK CHOW YON @ HA CHAI & ORS - 2025 MarsdenLR 1764LAU CHOON YEUB (F) & ANOR vs MAK CHOW YON @ HA CHAI & ORS - 2025 MarsdenLR 3072 – Writ triggers.5. CEKAL BERJASA SDN BHD vs TENAGA NASIONAL BHD - 2006 MarsdenLR 337CEKAL BERJASA SDN BHD vs TENAGA NASIONAL BHD - 2006 MarsdenLR 3338 – General modes.
#CompaniesAct #OriginatingSummons #MalaysiaLaw
GROUNDS OF JUDGMENT The Applicants filed an Ex-parte Originating Summons for a Scheme of Arrangement and Reconstruction under section 176(1) of the Companies Act. ... , originating summons, originating motion or Petition . ... mentioned in rules 3, 4 and 5 , every (other) application under the Act must, in accordance with Order 5, rule 3, be made by Originating Summons. ... [3] Order 5 Rule 4(1) reads :- Except in ....
GROUNDS OF JUDGMENT The Applicants filed an Ex-parte Originating Summons for a Scheme of Arrangement and Reconstruction under section 176(1) of the Companies Act. 2. ... or by or under any written law are required to be begun ... proceedings may be begun either by writ or by Originating Summons .. .". ... in accordance with Order 5, rule 3, be made by Originating Summons. ... Court :- Order 5 Rule (1) - "Subject to the provision....
GROUNDS OF JUDGMENT The Applicants filed an Ex-parte Originating Summons for a Scheme of Arrangement and Reconstruction under section 176(1) of the Companies Act. Except in the case of proceedings which by these rules or by or under any written law are required to be begun ... proceedings may be begun either by writ or by Originating Summons .. .". ... in accordance with Order 5, rule 3, be made by Originating Summons. ... Court :....
GROUNDS OF JUDGMENT The Applicants filed an Ex-parte Originating Summons for a Scheme of Arrangement and Reconstruction under section 176(1) of the Companies Act. , every (other) application under the Act must, in accordance with Order 5, rule 3, be made by Originating Summons. ... proceeding in the High Court :- Order 5 Rule (1) - "Subject to the provisions of any written law and of these rules , civil proceedings .. be begun by writ, orig....
Companies Act 2016 , reads as follows: Companies Act 2016 on the basis that, among others, the First Defendant had unfairly oppressed, discriminated against and/or prejudiced the Plaintiff as a minority shareholder. ... Choong Yeow Choy JC:Introduction ROC to treat or continue proceedings that are specifically required to be commenced by originating summons as if they had been begun by writ. Courts should only do so if it is necessary to ensure the just disposal of ....
Companies Act 2016 , reads as follows: 2. Except for the proceedings specified in Appendix C relating to the winding up of companies and capital reduction under the Act, proceedings under the Act shall be commenced by originating summons. ... JUDGMENT Choong Yeow Choy JC: Introduction ROC to treat or continue proceedings that are specifically required to be commenced by originating summons as if they had been begun by wri....
Syed Ahmad Helmy JC: The question for determination in this application is whether the mode of commencement by way of originating motion by the applicant for the production of the application form relating to the third party charge is the proper mode. ... and at para h of p. 469 he concluded: As mentioned earlier, originating motion not being the required or authorised mode, and the nature of the application is not one to be made by a petition, so what is left is the origina....
(v)some applications under the Companies Act 1965 (Act 125), eg for rectification of the company register see O. 88 r. 3. (vi)applications under the Trade Marks Act 1976 (Act 175). ... and at para h of p. 469 he concluded: As mentioned earlier, originating motion not being the required or authorised mode, and the nature of the application is not one to be made by a petition, so what is left is the originating summons or a #HL_ST....
and at para h of p. 469 he concluded: As mentioned earlier, originating motion not being the required or authorised mode, and the nature of the application is not one to be made by a petition, so what is left is the originating summons or a writ. ... JUDGMENT Syed Ahmad Helmy JC: The question for determination in this application is whether the mode of commencement by way of originating motion by the applicant for the production of the applicatio....
(v)some applications under the Companies Act 1965 (Act 125), eg for rectification of the company register see O. 88 r. 3. (vi)applications under the Trade Marks Act 1976 (Act 175). ... Upon a careful analysis of all the eight rules of O. 12 I find that the requirement of entry of appearance under the RHC, is only confined to writ of summons and originating summons. ... or a writ. ... JUDGMENT Syed Ahmad Helmy JC:....
The Court of Appeal noted: “What, then, was an “originating summons” at that time? This procedure was further simplified by the Act of 1852 under which in certain cases the commencement of a suit in Chancery was contemplated by a summons originating proceedings in chambers. It still meant a summons which originated proceedings in Chancery, the summons being substituted for a writ in a suit or an action, which had by the Judicature Act taken the place of a suit” It was a method of commencing proceedings in Chancery by a summons in chambers instead of by bill. Under the Gener....
If the questions raised in this Originating Summons fall for consideration in any other proceedings, the court or authority is bound, absent anything else, to consider and decide the same. 56(A). A Division Bench of this Court in the case of Mazda Theaters Limited v. Gordhandas, (1954) 56 BLR 1080 held as under :- This judgment is, therefore, of no assistance to Mr. Setalwad. The nature and purpose of an Originating Summons also indicates the fundamental difference between an Originating Summons and other proceedings. "The right contemplated by that rule is any right, and t....
It was stated in the affidavit it was urged that the plaintiff. respondent was trying to harass the family members by initiating various civil and criminal proceedings against the appellants and a suit had been filed by the plaintiff-respondent being Title Suit No. 1856 of 1996 in the City Civil Court at Calcutta claiming a declaration that he is a Trustee of the said Trust Property. 4. In the said proceedings for Originating Summons, numbered as O.S. Suit No. 269 of 1997, an affidavit was filed by the appellants raising various contentions.
The only question that is raised by the plaintiffs in this originating summons relates to the mode of appointment of the President. Clause (g) of the said Rule clearly empowers the Court to determine any question arising in the administration of the estate or Trust. In my opinion, unless it is shown that the disputed facts are of such complexity as to involve a considerable amount of oral evidence, the jurisdiction to decide the question of the mode of appointment of the President, application of Rule 238 cannot be excluded on the basis of a bald plea that the facts are dis....
That the expression "document" used in Section 51 of the Companies Act includes summons is clear from section 2(15) of the Companies Act. 8. SECTION 51 of the Companies Act, which deals with service of documents on companies enjoins that a document may be served on a company or an officer thereof by sending it to the company or officer at the registered office of the company by post under a certificate of posting or by registered post or by leaving it at its registered office. The result is that the provision of section 51 would prevail over Rule 2 of Order 29, Civil proced....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.