Kerajaan Malaysia v MEDITECH GLOVES SDN. BHD.(DAHULU DIKENALI SEBAGAI BEST PUTRA GLOVES SDN. BHD.)

ba-28ncc-392-07-2024 High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi) 4 May 2025 • BA-28NCC-392-07/2024

Catchwords

section 465(1)(e) of the Companies Act 2016 (“CA 2016”)- unable to pay its debts- of section 466(1)(a) CA 2016- Respondent’s persistent failure to satisfy the judgment debt despite repeated indulgence-Petition is based on a judgment obtained by the Government of Malaysia- Respondent failed to comply with this statutory demand- triggering the statutory presumption of insolvency under section 466(1)(a) CA 2016.- Respondent did not file any affidavit in opposition to the petition- no evidence placed before the Court disputing the Petitioner’s claim- debt is a valid and undisputed judgment debt- The Petitioner has fully complied with the procedural requirements prescribed under section 466(1)(a) CA 2016- statutory presumption of insolvency therefore stands unrebutted- Respondent’s repeated failure to adhere to the proposed settlement terms and to make any payments despite numerous indulgences reinforces the inference of commercial insolvency- the requirements for a winding-up order under section 465(1)(e) CA 2016 have been met.

Practice Areas

section 465(1)(e) of the Companies Act 2016 (“CA 2016”)- unable to pay its debts- of section 466(1)(a) CA 2016- Respondent’s persistent failure to satisfy the judgment debt despite repeated indulgence-Petition is based on a judgment obtained by the Government of Malaysia- Respondent failed to comply with this statutory demand- triggering the statutory presumption of insolvency under section 466(1)(a) CA 2016.- Respondent did not file any affidavit in opposition to the petition- no evidence placed before the Court disputing the Petitioner’s claim- debt is a valid and undisputed judgment debt- The Petitioner has fully complied with the procedural requirements prescribed under section 466(1)(a) CA 2016- statutory presumption of insolvency therefore stands unrebutted- Respondent’s repeated failure to adhere to the proposed settlement terms and to make any payments despite numerous indulgences reinforces the inference of commercial insolvency- the requirements for a winding-up order under section 465(1)(e) CA 2016 have been met.

Judges (1)

Raja Rozela binti Raja Toran Delivered

Parties (2)

Kerajaan Malaysia Petitioner MEDITECH GLOVES Sdn Bhd.(DAHULU DIKENALI SEBAGAI BEST PUTRA GLOVES Sdn Bhd.) Respondent

Case Significance

Kerajaan Malaysia v MEDITECH GLOVES SDN. BHD.(DAHULU DIKENALI SEBAGAI BEST PU... is a High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi) decision dated May 4, 2025 (citation: ba-28ncc-392-07-2024). The case was decided by Raja Rozela binti Raja Toran.

What was the outcome of Kerajaan Malaysia v MEDITECH GLOVES SDN. BHD.(DAHULU DIKENALI SEBAGAI BEST PU...?

Kerajaan Malaysia v MEDITECH GLOVES SDN. BHD.(DAHULU DIKENALI SEBAGAI BEST PU... is a High Court decision dated May 4, 2025. The case was heard by Raja Rozela binti Raja Toran. See the full judgment for details.