WIRAMA SDN BHD (IN LIQUIDATION) v 1. ) KHAIRIL AZAR BIN BADUR 2. ) YAP KOK BIN 3. ) TAM WEI LUM

wa-28pw-489-08-2025 High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi) 20 January 2026 • WA-28PW-489-08/2025 • 10 min read

2 cases cited (0 SG, 2 foreign)

Outcome

Accordingly, I granted an order in terms of prayers 1, (a) to (d) and prayer 3 of PW-489. I made no order as to prayer 2, being the alternative prayer to charge remuneration on a time cost basis.

Quoted verbatim from the judgment of High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi) (wa-28pw-489-08-2025). Read the full judgment on the official Malaysia Courts portal for the complete decision.

Catchwords

Company law – Winding up – Liquidator – Remuneration – Sections 479 and 487 Companies Act 2016 – Basis of remuneration – Percentage basis and time cost basis – Whether liquidator entitled to charge fees to third parties – Exercise of liquidator’s discretion – Whether fees reasonable – Application to approve remuneration – Whether court ought to interfere – Whether remuneration excessive

Practice Areas

Judges (1)

Suhendran Sockanathan Delivered

Counsel (6)

Ephraim & Associates Firm Teja Singh Penesar & Co Firm Manesh Kalai Selvan Counsel Applicant Pamela Ephraim Counsel Respondent S. Ranjini Counsel Respondent Vinesh Mathew Varghese Counsel Applicant

Parties (4)

WIRAMA Sdn Bhd (IN LIQUIDATION) Applicant Khairil Azar bin Badur Respondent Tam Wei Lum Respondent Yap Kok bin Respondent

Statutes Cited

Companies Act 2016 (Cap 777)

Cases Cited (2)

MY (2)

[2013] 2 MLJ 629 [2024] MLJU 2025

Judgment

Read the full judgment on the official Malaysia Courts portal.

Read on eJudgment

Source: eJudgment (wa-28pw-489-08-2025)