Perkhidmatan Alam Indah Sdn Bhd v Majlis Bandaraya Pulau Pinang

pa-21ncvc-2-01-2018 High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi) 26 February 2026 • PA-21NCvC-2-01/2018 • 39 min read
31 cases cited (0 SG, 31 foreign)

Catchwords

This suit is about whether a contract was validly terminated. And if it was, what quantum of damages should be awarded? The outcome of this suit largely depends on the evidence - The Defendant, Majlis Bandaraya Pulau Pinang ("Council"), is the city council and the statutory authority responsible for the parking management in Penang - The Council appointed the Plaintif, Perkhidmatan Alam Indah Sdn Bhd ("PAI"), under a Parking System Management Agreement dated 13.10.2014 (Agreement), to manage the Council's parking system - The bargain was a simple concession: PAI got the right to manage and collect revenue from the Council's parking infrastructure, in exchange for paying the Council a fixed monthly concession fee - PAI fell into arrears in its monthly payments. In October 2017, the Council issued a Notice to Remedy, demanding that PAI settle an outstanding sum of over RM4.14 million within 14 days. PAI failed to comply - In January 2018, the Council terminated the Agreement with immediate effect. As at the date of termination, accumulated arrears stood at over RM5.7 million - PAI filed this suit: (i) to challenge the validity of the termination, and (ii) to claim special damages of over RM2.98 million, as well as (iii) general damages arising from the termination, amounting to over RM28.64 million, across eight heads of damage - The Council counterclaims: (i) for the outstanding monthly fees of over RM5.7 million, (ii) for refunds given to the public for the unused money in the Smart Parking Gadgets (SPG) amounting to over RM64K, and (iii) for unpaid parking summonses (PTK) arising from PAI's failure to return the Enforcement Application System to the Council on termination, in the sum of over RM36.26 million. (PTK stands for “Pemberitahuan Tentang Kesalahan”.) - Who should succeed? Was the termination valid?

Judges (1)

Kenneth Yoong Ken Chinson St James Delivered

Parties (2)

MAJLIS BANDARAYA PULAU PINANG Defendant Perkhidmatan Alam Indah Sdn Bhd Plaintiff

Statutes Cited

Civil Law Act 1956
s 3
Contracts Act 1950 (Cap 136)
s 68

Cases Cited (31)

UK (2)
[1971] 1 WLR 361 [2022] EWHC 88
MY (29)
[1966] 1 MLRH 682 [1967] 1 MLJ 13 [1983] 2 CLJ 198 [1983] 2 MLJ 324 [1990] 1 CLJ 57 [1990] 1 MLJ 356 [1998] 3 AMR 2160 [1998] 3 CLJ 503 [1998] 3 MLJ 151 [1999] 3 AMR 3074 [1999] 3 CLJ 577 [1999] 3 MLJ 489 [2000] 5 MLJ 337 [2000] 6 MLRH 586 [2010] 9 MLRH 921 [2013] 10 MLJ 584 [2015] 6 MLJ 1 [2015] 8 CLJ 944 [2018] 5 MLJ 349 [2019] 3 CLJ 770 [2020] 3 CLJ 455 [2020] 6 MLJ 43 [2021] 2 AMR 1 [2021] 2 MLJ 374 [2021] 3 CLJ 159 [2021] MLJU 40 [2025] 10 CLJ 341 [2025] 6 MLJ 327 [2025] 8 AMR 229

Judgment

Read the full judgment on the official Malaysia Courts portal.

Read on eJudgment

Source: eJudgment (pa-21ncvc-2-01-2018)