PUBLIC ISLAMIC BANK BERHAD v EDWIN CASSIAN A/L NAGAPPAN @ MARIE

w-04imncvc-20-01-2022 Court of Appeal (Mahkamah Rayuan) 27 November 2025 • W-04(IM)(NCvC)-20-01/2022 • 19 min read

12 cases cited (0 SG, 12 foreign)

Catchwords

HIRE PURCHASE: Repossession — Leave of court — Application for — Instalments exceeding 75% of cash price paid — Default of two consecutive instalments — Application for leave to issue statutory notices under s. 16(1A) Hire-Purchase Act 1967 — Whether application to be made inter partes or ex parte — Purpose of s. 16(1A) — Whether mere procedural safeguard to verify defaults — Natural justice — Audi alteram partem — Whether right to be heard preserved by issuance of Fourth Schedule Notice — Hire-Purchase Act 1967, ss. 16(1), (1A) & (1B) CIVIL PROCEDURE: Originating Summons — Ex parte application — Application for leave of court to commence repossession proceedings — Challenge against validity of ex parte order — Whether application required to be inter partes — Rules of Court 2012 — Whether procedural fairness compromised — Nature of leave under s. 16(1A) Hire-Purchase Act 1967

Practice Areas

HIRE PURCHASE: Repossession

Judges (3)

Alwi bin Abdul Wahab Coram Azizah binti Haji Nawawi Delivered Collin Lawrence Sequerah Coram

Counsel (3)

Sidek Teoh Wong & Dennis Firm Divani Keruna Nithi Counsel Appellant Tan Hong Kait Counsel Appellant

Parties (2)

PUBLIC ISLAMIC BANK BERHAD Appellant Edwin Cassian a/l Nagappan @ Marie Respondent

Case Significance

PUBLIC ISLAMIC BANK BERHAD v EDWIN CASSIAN A/L NAGAPPAN @ MARIE is a Court of Appeal (Mahkamah Rayuan) decision dated November 27, 2025 (citation: w-04imncvc-20-01-2022). <p>Public Islamic Bank appealed against the High Court's decision allowing a hire-purchase borrower to set aside leave granted under section 16(1A) of the Hire-Purchase Act 1967 for repossession of a Mercedes Benz. The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, holding that the application for leave under section 16(1A) may be made ex parte and does not require inter partes proceedings.</p> The panel comprised Alwi bin Abdul Wahab, Azizah binti Haji Nawawi and Collin Lawrence Sequerah, with Azizah binti Haji Nawawi delivering the judgment. Counsel appearing: Divani Keruna Nithi (counsel for appellant), Tan Hong Kait (counsel for appellant).

Summary

Public Islamic Bank appealed against the High Court's decision allowing a hire-purchase borrower to set aside leave granted under section 16(1A) of the Hire-Purchase Act 1967 for repossession of a Mercedes Benz. The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, holding that the application for leave under section 16(1A) may be made ex parte and does not require inter partes proceedings.

What was the outcome of PUBLIC ISLAMIC BANK BERHAD v EDWIN CASSIAN A/L NAGAPPAN @ MARIE?

<p>Public Islamic Bank appealed against the High Court's decision allowing a hire-purchase borrower to set aside leave granted under section 16(1A) of...

Statutes Cited

Rules of Court 2012

Cases Cited (12)

MY (12)

[1976] 1 MLJ 83 [1996] 1 MLJ 30 [2002] 1 CLJ 645 [2002] 2 CLJ 30 [2002] 2 MLRH 458 [2002] 7 CLJ 377 [2003] 3 MLRH 217 [2003] 8 CLJ 376 [2003] MLJU 406 [2018] 4 AMR 944 [2018] 5 MLJ 281 [2018] 8 CLJ 145