U

UNITED OVERSEAS BANK BHD

Organisation 5 cases

About UNITED OVERSEAS BANK BHD

UNITED OVERSEAS BANK BHD appears as a party in 5 judgments in the MY Case Law database, spanning May 2018 to November 2025. UNITED OVERSEAS BANK BHD appeared as respondent in 2 cases, applicant in 1 case, defendant in 1 case. Cases span the High Court (3), Federal Court (2).

How many court cases involve UNITED OVERSEAS BANK BHD?

UNITED OVERSEAS BANK BHD appears in 5 published judgments from May 2018 to November 2025. Most commonly as respondent (2 cases).

In which Malaysian courts has UNITED OVERSEAS BANK BHD appeared?

UNITED OVERSEAS BANK BHD has appeared across High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi) (3 cases) and Federal Court (Mahkamah Persekutuan) (2 cases), totaling 5 judgments.

Practice Areas

Bankruptcy 2 Winding Up Petition 1 The Plaintiffs were directors and shareholders of Mentakab Star Mall Sdn Bhd (“MSMSB”) and personal guarantors of banking facilities granted by United Overseas Bank (Malaysia) Bhd (“UOB”). MSMSB defaulted, and receivers and managers were appointed pursuant to a debenture securing a commercial property known as Mentakab Star Mall (“the Mall”). After several failed attempts to dispose of the Mall, the receivers entered into a Sale and Purchase Agreement with the 4th Defendant for RM33 million. 1 Contending that the sale price was grossly undervalued compared with earlier valuations, the Plaintiffs commenced proceedings seeking, inter alia, to restrain completion of the sale pending trial. An ex-parte ad-interim injunction was initially granted. The receivers and the purchaser applied to set aside the injunction. 1 The Plaintiffs argued that there were serious issues to be tried regarding breach of duty by the receivers, that damages were inadequate, that the balance of convenience favoured maintaining the status quo, and that they could provide an undertaking as to damages. 1 The Defendants contended that the receivers acted within their contractual powers, that the Plaintiffs lacked locus standi, that any loss was purely monetary, that the transaction was substantially completed, and that the Plaintiffs had failed to make full and frank disclosure of material facts, including prior proceedings involving the same subject matter. 1 Held, dismissing the application for interim injunction and setting aside the ex-parte and ad-interim orders, with costs: 1 (1) The Plaintiffs failed to establish any bona fide serious issue to be tried. Clause 11.4.4 of the debenture conferred absolute discretion on the receivers to deal with and dispose of the charged asset. The evidence showed multiple prior unsuccessful sale attempts and that the RM33 million price reflected the highest offer available and aligned with a contemporaneous valuation. 1

Defendant (1)

cb-22ncc-8-09-2025 MYHC

1. ) TAN SRI DATO PHENG YIN HUAH 2. ) DATO PHENG CHIN KIAT v 1. ) LOK PENG CHUAN (Disaman dalam kapasiti sebagai Penerima dan Pengurus Mentakab Star Mall Sdn Bhd (Dalam Penerimaan)) 2. ) JASMIN BEGUM BINTI JAFFAR KHAN (Disaman dalam kapasiti sebagai Penerima dan Pengurus Mentakab Star Mall Sdn Bhd (Dalam Penerimaan)) 3. ) UNITED OVERSEAS BANK (MALAYSIA) BHD 4. ) MENTAKAB MALL SDN BHD (Dahulunya dikenali sebagai TYS Land & Development Sdn Bhd)

30 November 2025

Applicant (1)

wa-24fc-891-12-2022 MYHC

UNITED OVERSEAS BANK (MALAYSIA) BHD. v SATHIYATHAI A/P GOVINDASAMY

Petitioner (1)

ba-28ncc-547-10-2023 MYHC

UNITED OVERSEAS BANK (MALAYSIA) BHD v K-PINTAR SDN BHD

Respondent (2)

03f-2-04-2017w MYFC

1. ) MOHD KAMAL BIN OMAR 2. ) AZLIN AZRAI BIN LAN HAWARI 3. ) SIM KOK BENG v UNITED OVERSEAS BANK (MALAYSIA) BHD.

03f-2-04-2017w-03f-3-01-2017w-03f-4-01-2017w MYFC

1. ) Mohd Kamal bin Omar 2. ) Azlin Azrai bin Lan Hawari 3. ) Sim Kok Beng v United Overseas Bank (Malaysia) Bhd.