XXXX v Lim Chee Tat
Catchwords
Limitation Act 1953 (Section 6(3)) – Has Plaintiff shown sufficient reason for delay? – Leave to Enforce Judgment After 6 Years – Delay in Enforcement – Judgment Execution – Can judgment be enforced after 6 years – Order 46 Rule 2 – Plaintiff - Summary judgment - 17 May 2016 for RM 4,283,777.98 plus interest and costs. – Foreclosure proceedings initiated – Property sold only on 11 June 2024 after 10 attempts – Delay justified due to foreclosure and insolvency proceedings – Plaintiff took reasonable steps to recover judgment sum. Bankruptcy Proceedings – Insolvency Act 1967 (Sections 5(4), 105) – Does annulment of bankruptcy affect enforceability? – 1st and 3rd Defendants were wound up in 2016 – Proof of debt filed – Plaintiff claims RM 7.58 million still owed by 2nd Defendant as of January 2025 – Plaintiff initiated bankruptcy proceedings against 2nd Defendant, who had prior bankruptcies annulled under section 105 of the Insolvency Act – Annulment under section 105 does not extinguish debt; unlike discharge under section 35. Prejudice to Defendant – Is the enforcement sum within the guarantee provided by the 2nd Defendant? – Only principal sum and costs can be enforced – Enforcement sum is within the amount guaranteed by 2nd Defendant – No unfair prejudice to 2nd Defendant – Plaintiff not inactive.
Practice Areas
Judges (1)
Parties (2)
Case Significance
XXXX v Lim Chee Tat is a High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi) decision dated May 12, 2025 (citation: wa-22ncc-77-02-2016). The case was decided by Mohd Arief Emran bin Arifin.
What was the outcome of XXXX v Lim Chee Tat?
XXXX v Lim Chee Tat is a High Court decision dated May 12, 2025. The case was heard by Mohd Arief Emran bin Arifin. See the full judgment for details.