SENG SAN BING v SATIN STRAITS SDN. BHD. PIHAK TERKILAN Jaimie Sia Zui Keng

wa-37j-17-03-2024 High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi) 13 May 2025 • WA-37J-17-03/2024

Catchwords

Section 4(7) of the Debtors Act 1957-Order 74 Rules 12 and 13 ROC-The Debtors Act 1957 together with Order 74 ROC regulates the execution of a money judgment against a judgment debtor and also provides remedies for preventing a defendant from absconding and disposing of his property to frustrate the legal process and judgment that may be thereby made against him-execution of a money judgment against a judgment debtor, there is a 2-step process-Firstly, a Judgment debtor summons is issued pursuant to section 4(1) of the Debtors Act 1957 by a judgment creditor to obtain a Judgment debtor summons order under section 4(6) of the Debtors Act 1957-Secondly, a Judgment Notice is issued pursuant to section 4(7) of the Debtors Act 1957 read with Order 74 rule 12 ROC to enforce the Judgment debtor summons order under Order 74 rule 14 ROC by an order of commitment to prison for having disobeyed the Judgment debtor summons order-The Debtors Act 1957 section 4(7) provides that if the judgment debtor makes default in payment according to any court order made upon hearing of the judgment debtor summons under section 4(6), a notice in the form prescribed by rules of court may be issued on the request of the judgment creditor, calling upon the judgment debtor to attend before the court at the time therein and show cause why he should not be committed to prison for such default-Order 74 ROC provides the procedure and forms of request to be used by the judgment creditor for notice (referred to as “judgment notice”) to be issued to the judgment debtor for attending before the court to show cause under section 4(7) Debtors Act 1957. Order 74 rule 13 ROC prescribes the form of such judgment notice-if there is non-compliance with a JDS Order by a corporation, there is no provision under section 4(7) Debtors Act 1957 to summon and commit an officer of that corporation to prison, more so a person who is no longer an officer of that corporation. Section 4(7) Debtors Act 1957 as drafted is applicable only to a human debtor-Section 4(7) Debtors Act being a penal section must be construed strictly-the JC may initiate contempt proceedings against the directors of the JD for not paying the judgment sum provided all procedural requirements have been complied with-burden of proof-pursuant to Section 208(3) of the Companies Act 2016 -Jaimie’s resignation is effective on 10-06-2024 when his resignation letter dated 10-06-2024-delivered to the Company Secretaries-It is the duty of the Company Secretaries of the JD to update the registry of the CCM on Jaimie’s resignation within 14 days from the date of resignation. [See: section 58(1)(c) Companies Act]

Practice Areas

Section 4(7) of the Debtors Act 1957-Order 74 Rules 12 and 13 ROC-The Debtors Act 1957 together with Order 74 ROC regulates the execution of a money judgment against a judgment debtor and also provides remedies for preventing a defendant from absconding and disposing of his property to frustrate the legal process and judgment that may be thereby made against him-execution of a money judgment against a judgment debtor, there is a 2-step process-Firstly, a Judgment debtor summons is issued pursuant to section 4(1) of the Debtors Act 1957 by a judgment creditor to obtain a Judgment debtor summons order under section 4(6) of the Debtors Act 1957-Secondly, a Judgment Notice is issued pursuant to section 4(7) of the Debtors Act 1957 read with Order 74 rule 12 ROC to enforce the Judgment debtor summons order under Order 74 rule 14 ROC by an order of commitment to prison for having disobeyed the Judgment debtor summons order-The Debtors Act 1957 section 4(7) provides that if the judgment debtor makes default in payment according to any court order made upon hearing of the judgment debtor summons under section 4(6), a notice in the form prescribed by rules of court may be issued on the request of the judgment creditor, calling upon the judgment debtor to attend before the court at the time therein and show cause why he should not be committed to prison for such default-Order 74 ROC provides the procedure and forms of request to be used by the judgment creditor for notice (referred to as “judgment notice”) to be issued to the judgment debtor for attending before the court to show cause under section 4(7) Debtors Act 1957. Order 74 rule 13 ROC prescribes the form of such judgment notice-if there is non-compliance with a JDS Order by a corporation, there is no provision under section 4(7) Debtors Act 1957 to summon and commit an officer of that corporation to prison, more so a person who is no longer an officer of that corporation. Section 4(7) Debtors Act 1957 as drafted is applicable only to a human debtor-Section 4(7) Debtors Act being a penal section must be construed strictly-the JC may initiate contempt proceedings against the directors of the JD for not paying the judgment sum provided all procedural requirements have been complied with-burden of proof-pursuant to Section 208(3) of the Companies Act 2016 -Jaimie’s resignation is effective on 10-06-2024 when his resignation letter dated 10-06-2024-delivered to the Company Secretaries-It is the duty of the Company Secretaries of the JD to update the registry of the CCM on Jaimie’s resignation within 14 days from the date of resignation. See: section 58(1)(c) Companies Act

Judges (1)

Leong Wai Hong Delivered

Parties (3)

SATIN STRAITS Sdn Bhd Defendant Jaimie Sia Zui Keng Aggrieved Party Seng San Bing Plaintiff

Case Significance

SENG SAN BING v SATIN STRAITS SDN. BHD. PIHAK TERKILAN Jaimie Sia Zui Keng is a High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi) decision dated May 13, 2025 (citation: wa-37j-17-03-2024). The case was decided by Leong Wai Hong.

What was the outcome of SENG SAN BING v SATIN STRAITS SDN. BHD. PIHAK TERKILAN Jaimie Sia Zui Keng?

SENG SAN BING v SATIN STRAITS SDN. BHD. PIHAK TERKILAN Jaimie Sia Zui Keng is a High Court decision dated May 13, 2025. The case was heard by Leong Wai Hong. See the full judgment for details.