Techware Enterprise Sdn Bhd v 1. ) Chan Sai Khuen 2. ) Ong Choo Keng

pa-12ancvc-44-10-2023 High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi) 25 July 2024 • PA-12ANCvC-44-10/2023 • 21 min read
10 cases cited (0 SG, 10 foreign)

Outcome

Page 19 of 20 [60] For these reasons, I dismissed D’s appeal against the summary judgment entered against D. I upheld the decision of the Sessions Court. As for costs, I ordered D to pay Ps costs of RM7K by 26.8.2024. Costs were subject to the allocatur.

Quoted verbatim from the judgment of High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi) (pa-12ancvc-44-10-2023). Read the full judgment on the official Malaysia Courts portal for the complete decision.

Catchwords

1. The Appellant-Defendant (D) was the developer of a housing development project known as “The Retreat”. The Respondents-Plaintiffs (Ps) were the purchasers of a parcel of property in the Project. 2. D and Ps entered into a prescribed Schedule H (Housing Development (Control And Licensing) Regulations 1989) sale and purchase agreement (SPA) to govern the purchase. D failed to deliver vacant possession of Ps’ unit within the contracted period. This made D liable to pay Ps “liquidated damages” (LD), according to the relevant terms of the SPA. 3. Ps filed this suit in the Sessions Court to claim the amount of LD they asserted they were entitled to. Ps applied to enter summary judgment against D (under Order 14 of the Rules Of Court 2012). D resisted the entry of a summary judgment. The Sessions Court allowed Ps’ application and ordered summary judgment to be entered against D. D appealed to the High Court. This was the appeal before me. 4. Should I have allowed D’s appeal i.e. set aside the summary judgment? Or should I have dismissed D’s appeal i.e. sustained the summary judgment?

Practice Areas

Civil Procedure Housing Development Contract

Judges (1)

Kenneth Yoong Ken Chinson St James Delivered

Counsel (5)

N. Ahilan & Associates Firm Presgrave & Matthews Firm A. Suppiah Counsel Respondent David Tan Counsel Respondent N. Ahilan Counsel Appellant

Parties (3)

TECHWARE ENTERPRISE Sdn Bhd Appellant Chan Sai Khuen Respondent Ong Choo Keng Respondent

Statutes Cited

Courts of Judicature Act 1964 (Cap 91)
Courts Of Judicature Act 1964
s 68(1)(a)
Rules of Court 2012

Cases Cited (10)

MY (10)
[1987] 1 CLJ 246 [1987] 2 MLJ 183 [1992] 1 CLJ 627 [1992] 1 MLJ 400 [1995] 1 AMR 622 [1995] 1 MLJ 281 [2000] 1 CLJ 503 [2021] 2 CLJ 441 [2021] 2 MLJ 60 [2021] 3 AMR 449

Judgment

Read the full judgment on the official Malaysia Courts portal.

Read on eJudgment

Source: eJudgment (pa-12ancvc-44-10-2023)