THIYAGARAJAN A/L MPL YEGAPPAN v 1. ) KERAJAAN MALAYSIA 2. ) MENTERI UNDANG-UNDANG & REFORMASI INSTITUSI KERAJAAN MALAYSIA 3. ) KETUA HAKIM NEGARA MALAYSIA 4. ) KETUA PENGARAH INSOLVENSI MALAYSIA 5. ) CIMB BANK BERHAD 6. ) DATO ROBERT TEO KHENG TUAN 7. ) PENDAFTAR HAKMILIK, PEJABAT PENGARAH TANAH DAN GALIAN NEGERI KEDAH DARULAMAN

ka-24ncvc-165-06-2025 High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi) 12 November 2025 • KA-24NCvC-165-06/2025 • 22 min read

3 cases cited (0 SG, 3 foreign)

Catchwords

ORIGINATING SUMMON Issues: (a) The absence of sanction- whether it bars the present action? (b) Whether section 38(1)(a) of the Insolvency Act, in its current form, imposes undue hardship upon undischarged bankrupts. Legislative reform is warranted to ensure fairness and justice in its application? (c) Whether, by naming the Director General of Insolvency Malaysia as a party to the proceedings, the requirement of obtaining sanction from the Director General of Insolvency Malaysia is thereby dispensed with?

Practice Areas

Judges (1)

Mohd Aimi Zaini bin Mohd Azhar Delivered

Counsel (10)

FirozJulian Firm Jabatan Insolvensi Malaysia Negeri Kedah Firm Pejabat Penasihat Undang-Undang Negeri Kedah Firm Shaikh David & Co Firm Mah Dick Son Counsel Defendant Nur Ainnabila Rosdi Counsel Defendant Nurul Liyana Binti Mohd Nasir Counsel Defendant Qatrin Nada binti Harun Counsel Defendant Suhaimi bin Remli Counsel Defendant Zairani binti Tugiran Counsel Defendant

Parties (8)

CIMB BANK BERHAD Respondent KETUA PENGARAH INSOLVENSI MALAYSIA Respondent Kerajaan Malaysia Respondent MENTERI UNDANG-UNDANG & REFORMASI INSTITUSI KERAJAAN MALAYSIA Respondent PENDAFTAR HAKMILIK, PEJABAT PENGARAH TANAH DAN GALIAN NEGERI KEDAH DARULAMAN Respondent Dato Robert Teo Kheng Tuan Respondent Ketua Hakim Negara Malaysia Respondent Thiyagarajan a/l Mpl Yegappan Applicant

Case Significance

THIYAGARAJAN A/L MPL YEGAPPAN v 1. ) KERAJAAN MALAYSIA 2. ) MENTERI UNDANG-UN... is a High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi) decision dated November 12, 2025 (citation: ka-24ncvc-165-06-2025). <p>An undischarged bankrupt filed three originating summonses against multiple parties including the Government, DGI, CIMB Bank, and a liquidator, seeking to prevent auction of secured land. The court struck out all three actions, finding the plaintiff failed to obtain the mandatory sanction of the Director General of Insolvency under Section 38(1)(a) of the Insolvency Act before commencing proceedings, and his attempts to circumvent the requirement by naming the DGI as a party were untenable.</ The case was decided by Mohd Aimi Zaini bin Mohd Azhar. Counsel appearing: Mah Dick Son (counsel for defendant), Nur Ainnabila Rosdi (counsel for defendant), Nurul Liyana Binti Mohd Nasir (counsel for defendant), Qatrin Nada binti Harun (counsel for defendant), Suhaimi bin Remli (counsel for defendant), Zairani binti Tugiran (counsel for defendant).

Key issues: ORIGINATING SUMMON Issues: (a) The absence of sanction- whether it bars the present action?.

Summary

An undischarged bankrupt filed three originating summonses against multiple parties including the Government, DGI, CIMB Bank, and a liquidator, seeking to prevent auction of secured land. The court struck out all three actions, finding the plaintiff failed to obtain the mandatory sanction of the Director General of Insolvency under Section 38(1)(a) of the Insolvency Act before commencing proceedings, and his attempts to circumvent the requirement by naming the DGI as a party were untenable.

What was the outcome of THIYAGARAJAN A/L MPL YEGAPPAN v 1. ) KERAJAAN MALAYSIA 2. ) MENTERI UNDANG-UN...?

<p>An undischarged bankrupt filed three originating summonses against multiple parties including the Government, DGI, CIMB Bank, and a liquidator, see...

Statutes Cited

Courts of Judicature Act 1964 (Cap 91)

Insolvency Act

s 38(1)(a)

Insolvency Act 1967 (Cap 360)

s 27(2) s 38(1)(a)

National Land Code (Cap 828)

Cases Cited (3)

MY (3)

[1933] 2 MLJ 98 [1998] 5 CLJ 769 [2020] 9 CLJ 449