RHB BANK BERHAD v YEE YEN TONG SDN. BHD.
Catchwords
COMPANIES AND CORPORATIONS: Winding up, Petition, Conditions precedent, Advertisement of petition, Mandatory compliance with r 24 Companies (Winding-Up) Rules 1972, Petition required to be advertised once in Gazette and twice in two local newspapers, Whether advertisement proved where affidavit stated publication in newspaper on specified dates but exhibited newspaper cuttings bore different year, Whether contradiction between affidavit and exhibit displaced prima facie proof of publication, Whether publication in one newspaper only sufficient, Whether dates of publication sufficiently proved where only loose newspaper cuttings exhibited without complete dated newspaper pages, Companies (Winding-Up) Rules 1972, rr 21, 24. COMPANIES AND CORPORATIONS: Winding up, Petition, Advertisement, Proof of publication, Memorandum of advertisement, Evidential value, Whether memorandum filed under r 21(c) sufficient where contradicted by petitioner’s own documentary exhibits, Companies (Winding-Up) Rules 1972, r 21(c). COMPANIES AND CORPORATIONS: Winding up, Petition, Advertisement, Notice of intention to appear, Advertisement specifying earlier deadline than prescribed by r 28, Whether departure from mandatory timeline fatal where no prejudice occasioned, Companies (Winding-Up) Rules 1972, rr 24, 28. COMPANIES AND CORPORATIONS: Winding up, Petition, Service of petition, Conditions precedent, Registered office, Petition received by unnamed individual under chop of entity unrelated to company, Whether recipient shown to be member, officer or servant of company within meaning of r 25(1), Whether alternative mode of service by leaving petition at registered office established, Companies (Winding-Up) Rules 1972, r 25. COMPANIES AND CORPORATIONS: Winding up, Petition, Service of petition, Affidavit of service, Burden of proof, Whether petitioner discharged burden of proving service strictly in accordance with mandatory requirements of r 25, Companies (Winding-Up) Rules 1972, r 25. COMPANIES AND CORPORATIONS: Winding up, Petition, Verification affidavit, Corporate petitioner, Principal officer, Affidavit affirmed by Head of SME Recovery Centre, Whether deponent shown to be “director, secretary or other principal officer” within meaning of r 26, Whether omission to establish deponent’s status constituted procedural irregularity, Companies (Winding-Up) Rules 1972, r 26. COMPANIES AND CORPORATIONS: Winding up, Petition, Verification affidavit, Accuracy of verification, Petition averring statutory demand served at registered office and business address, Petitioner’s own evidence showing service only at registered office and solicitors’ office, Whether verification inaccurate to extent inconsistent with supporting evidence. COMPANIES AND CORPORATIONS: Winding up, Inability to pay debts, Statutory demand, Service, Demand personally served upon director at solicitors’ office, Whether service complied with statutory requirement that demand be left at company’s registered office, Whether subsequent service at registered office sufficient to invoke statutory presumption, Companies Act 2016, s 466(1)(a). COMPANIES AND CORPORATIONS: Winding up, Statutory demand, Petition, Pleading, Petition alleging service at both registered office and business address, Whether allegation inaccurate where no service effected at business address. COMPANIES AND CORPORATIONS: Winding up, Jurisdiction, Conditions precedent, Advertisement and service of petition, Whether compliance with rr 24 and 25 mandatory before winding-up order may be made, Whether court entitled to refuse winding-up order notwithstanding absence of opposition, Companies (Winding-Up) Rules 1972, rr 24, 25. COMPANIES AND CORPORATIONS: Winding up, Unopposed petition, Court’s duty, Class remedy, In rem proceedings, Whether absence of opposition diminished court’s obligation to scrutinise compliance with mandatory
Judges (1)
Judgment
Read the full judgment on the official Malaysia Courts portal.
Read on eJudgmentSource: eJudgment (ma-28ncc-27-05-2026)