Rajakumaran Muthusamy
About Rajakumaran Muthusamy
Rajakumaran Muthusamy appears as counsel of record in 3 reported Malaysia judgments (2025–2026). These were heard before MYHC (3).
On the court record
Illustrates the intersection of company winding-up, contract validity and limitation when sale and purchase agreements are executed before a developer is wound up.
Rajakumaran Muthusamy appears in this corpus as counsel for the plaintiffs in a group of related High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi) suits arising from the collapse of a property development. The common backdrop was that the developer had been wound up after the execution of sale and purchase agreements with the purchasers, and the litigation explored the consequences of that sequence for the enforceability of those agreements and the purchasers' remedies.
Several of the matters were framed for determination as questions of law under Order 14A of the Rules of Court 2012, a procedure that allows the court to decide a discrete legal question without a full trial where the facts permit. The questions included whether the sale and purchase agreements were unlawful as contravening sections 223 and 293 of the Companies Act 1965 — provisions concerned with dispositions of property after the commencement of winding up — and whether such agreements executed after the presentation of a winding-up petition were void ab initio in the absence of a validation order. A related issue was whether the agreements had been frustrated under section 57(2) of the Contracts Act 1950 once performance became impossible.
The suits also raised a limitation defence. In one action, framed for striking out under Order 18 rule 19 of the Rules of Court 2012, the court considered whether the claim was plainly unsustainable and whether it was time-barred, the action being founded on contract and therefore subject to the six-year limitation period under section 6(1)(a) of the Limitation Act 1953. As counsel for the plaintiff-purchasers, Rajakumaran Muthusamy's task was to sustain their claims against the developer and connected parties in the face of arguments that the agreements were void or frustrated and that the claims were time-barred. The matters illustrate the difficult intersection of company winding-up, contract and limitation that arises when a developer becomes insolvent after selling units.
How many cases has Rajakumaran Muthusamy appeared in?
Rajakumaran Muthusamy appears as counsel of record in 3 reported Malaysia judgments (2025–2026).
Which courts does Rajakumaran Muthusamy appear in?
Rajakumaran Muthusamy appears before MYHC (3).
How did the winding up of the developer affect the sale and purchase agreements?
The court considered whether agreements executed after the presentation of the winding-up petition were void ab initio, in the absence of a validation order, as contravening sections 223 and 293 of the Companies Act 1965, and whether they had been frustrated under section 57(2) of the Contracts Act 1950.
What limitation issue arose?
Whether the purchasers' claims, founded on contract, were time-barred under the six-year limitation period in section 6(1)(a) of the Limitation Act 1953 — argued on an application to strike out under Order 18 rule 19 of the Rules of Court 2012.