Pugaleswaran Thavar A/L Alagupandi v Aqrs the Building Company Sdn. Bhd. (WA-22NCvC-703-12/2025)

PUGALESWARAN THAVAR A/L ALAGUPANDI (No. K/P: 890516-14-5057)

MOHD AKMAL IYAZI BIN SAIDIN (No. K/P: 920720-14-6211)

NURAYUNI BINTI PAUZI (No. K/P: 910329-06-5460)

MUHAMMAD ASHRAF BIN ROHAIZAD (No. K/P: 910715-14-6701)

TENGKU SAIFUL HASNY BIN TENGKU ABDULLAH (No. K/P: 780529-11-5001)

AZLIZA BINTI MOHD SARIF (No. K/P: 760704-01-7452/A3396026)

KAMARUL FADZLI BIN KAMALUDDIN (No. K/P: 921020-06-5511)

AHMAD ADUAR BIN ADNAN (No. K/P: 880209-10-5347)

A’FIFA BIN THAZALI (No. K/P: 910218-01-5516)

MUHAMMAD ALIFF BIN MOHAMAD ALI HANAFIAH (No. K/P: 940124-14-6483)

AIN SYAMSULIYANA BINTI SHAMSOL AZMAN (No. K/P: 940606-08-5054) 07/04/2026 14:27:23

MUHAMMAD AMIRUL IDHAM BIN AHMAD MARUWI (No. K/P: 910622-10-5425)

AHMAD SHARIFFUDEEN BIN SULAIMAN (No. K/P: 910508-06-5079)

NORSHAMIMI BINTI IBRAHIM (No. K/P: 911017-06-6004)

MUHAMAD SHAHIDULHAFIZIE BIN MOHAMAD ROSDI (No. K/P: 871107-14-6231)

YONG JIUNN JYE (No. K/P: 911019-10-5767)

AMIRA BINTI RAZALI (No. K/P: 920812-14-5304)

FARID NOR BIN MD REDUAN (No. K/P: 800803-14-6251)

MUHAMMAD FIKRI BIN ROSLI (No. K/P: 920211-14-5309)

NADIA BINTI RAMLAN (No. K/P: 950312-01-5164)

ANDREW A/L MARAI FRANCIS (No. K/P: 870629-05-5363)

NURUL ADILAH BINTI IBRAHIM (No. K/P: 860712-43-5150)

JEYAPRIYA A/P VIJAYALINGAM (No. K/P: 950912-08-5940)

SITI SUHIDA BINTI NAPIALPHRI (No. K/P: 880712-06-5776)

SUZIANA BINTI A WAHAB (No. K/P: 781017-11-5002)

DESMOND TAN CHIA LERK (No. K/P: 830826-10-5697)

SHARIFAH SHAFIQAH BINTI SYED SALIM (No. K/P: 901201-10-5262)

PAVITHRAN A/L R JEVTHRAM (No. K/P: 860729-43-5091)

RAMACHANDRAN A/L MUNIANDY (No. K/P: 651104-08-5977)

NURFARAHIN BINTI ZULKARNAIN HELMI (No. K/P: 920728-14-5942)

MOHAMMAD RAFIUDDIN BIN RAMLI (No. K/P: 920919-14-6809)

AHMAD SYAMIL BIN MAT RANI (No. K/P: 901116-12-5445)

ROSMIERA BINTI ROSLAN (No. K/P: 920422-14-5536)

JANNATIE BINTI PAMMU (No. K/P: 860418-12-5418)

CHONG WAI HONG (No. K/P: 900803-10-5035)

AU KAI’YIN (No. K/P: 890919-08-5343)

ONG BEE SIM (No. K/P: 910925-10-5430)

MUHAMMAD FAIDHI FAISAL BIN ZAINAL (No. K/P: 910805-14-6107/RF207984(K))

NORHAYATI BINTI AHMAD (No. K/P: 911206-02-5420)

MOHD HAIKAL ANDY BIN ABDULLAH (No. K/P: 820323-08-5103)

HO PUI KUEN (No. K/P: 790726-05-5254)

HAZRINA BINTI ABU SEMAN (No. K/P: 880311-11-5226)

SARAH AIN BINTI MOHD (No. K/P: 931002-11-5190)

NASHITAH BINTI REDZLAN (No. K/P: 921024-06-5834)

NUR NADIA SYAZANA BINTI MOHD ZAKI (No. K/P: 910329-05-5078)

HEW SIEW NGAN (No. K/P: 830105-08-6342)

ROYSTANCE STEVENSON ANAK TUA (No. K/P: 870602-06-5637)

MOHD KHAIRUL RIDHWAN BIN ROSLI (No. K/P: 830614-11-5433)

LEONG TUCK LUN (No. K/P: 811124-05-5159)

LEOW XIN YI (No. K/P: 921007-08-5366)

NOORBAZIRA BINTI MOHAMAD (No. K/P: 800526-71-5138)

LIM KAH LOON (No. K/P: 830508-07-5015)

CHEAH SIN NEE (No. K/P: 900408-02-5302)

MURRALI DHARAN A/L SANMUGAM (No. K/P: 820819-08-5887)

SURAYA BINTI JOHAN (No. K/P: 890305-08-5840)

MUHAMMAD HAZIQ BIN AHMAD KAMEL (No. K/P: 950519-14-5089)

NURSUHAILA BINTI AMINUDIN (No. K/P: 960717-01-5364)

HAFSAH BINTI ABD. KADIR (No. K/P: 660109-01-5008)

OOI SOO MEE (No. K/P: 681129-08-5866)

CHAN MAN THONG (No. K/P: 631220-08-6303)

AHMAD FAHD BIN MOHAMED FATHILLAH (No. K/P: 810119-14-5499)

NUR SALEHA BINTI OSMAN (No. K/P: 810304-01-5864)

MOHD NAFIZAL BIN MOHD NAYAN (No. K/P: 910809-02-5088)

NUR SYUHADAH BINTI ZULQURNAIN (No. K/P: 910601-01-5674)

MUHAMMAD FIRDAUS BIN ISMAIL (No. K/P: 901106-10-5619)

IMA ELENA BINTI ISNU (No. K/P: 901120-03-5928)

AZILLA BINTI AHMAD (No. K/P: 851017-06-5464)

ALMIRA VALENTINA A/P JOSEPH JAGAN (No. K/P: 890214-14-5318)

VINOD A/L PALANI KUMAR (No. K/P: 900607-01-5625)

SUNDARI A/P RAMAKRISHNAN (No. K/P: 890115-08-6148)

RUHAYU BINTI HISHAM (No. K/P: 941115-05-5074)

SITI MARIAM BINTI OSMAN (No. K/P: 880216-14-5072)

MOHD HAZRIQ BIN MAHMOD (No. K/P: 880218-43-5145)

NAZMIR BIN ZAINUDIN (No. K/P: 831006-10-5821)

ROSLIANA BINTI ISMAIL (No. K/P: 820321-14-5600)

HAMZAH BIN MOHAMAD (No. K/P: 900112-06-5065)

MUHAMMAD HAMZAH BIN BAHARUDIN (No. K/P: 881214-56-5457)

ZAFIRAH BINTI AHMAD ZAN (No. K/P: 881012-04-5656)

SYAZWAN AIZAD BIN ABDUL MUTALIB (No. K/P: 900902-10-5041)

SAFWAN IZZATY BIN SAHARUDDIN (No. K/P: 911029-14-5877)

NOR HIDAYAH BINTI SHAHRUDIN (No. K/P: 881214-56-6302)

MADIHAH BINTI MOHD KADIR (No. K/P: 910106-02-5138)

NORAZIMAH BINTI SHAMSUDDIN (No. K/P: 640718-06-5838)

MOHD ANUAR BIN SAZALI (No. K/P: 851214-14-5615)

SITI AMILA BINTI JUSOH (No. K/P: 910125-11-5024)

KHAIRUL ANUAR BIN ABDUL SAMAD (No. K/P: 810210-01-5329)

NOR HAYATI BINTI MINHAT (No. K/P: 770531-10-5268)

MUHAMMAD AKMAL BIN ISMAIL (No. K/P: 930301-02-5537)

MUHAMMAD HAMZI BIN KHALID (No. K/P: 941212-14-5813)

MUHAMMAD AMIRUL AZZIM BIN ZULKIFLY (No. K/P: 940408-05-5399)

WAN NUR FARHANIM RADZIAH BINTI ALI (No. K/P: 890524-03-5448)

ANIS FATIHAH BINTI MOHAMMAD YUSOFF (No. K/P: 900910-03-5354)

MOHAMMAD IKHWAN BIN ABDUL HAMID (No. K/P: 910320-02-6481)

ELANGO A/L NADARAJA (No. K/P: 840405-05-5877)

NUR AIN MASTURA BINTI ALWIE (No. K/P: 880217-11-5406)

MUHAMMAD YUSRA BIN OSMAN (No. K/P: 940615-10-6435)

WAN SAMIR FARHAN BIN WAN HAZMI (No. K/P: 940819-08-5771)

DAHLIA BINTI MOHD SALEH (No. K/P: 910328-05-5084)

NURUL ATIKAH BINTI ZOKRI (No. K/P: 930901-14-6586)

MUHAMMAD AZRI BIN AMIRULLAH (No. K/P: 950526-06-5247)

NURNATASYA QUL’AIN BINTI NORULHADI (No. K/P: 951204-10-6370)

JASON HO CHEE WAI (No. K/P: 900811-04-5063)

CHANG SHEAH LEE (No. K/P: 890722-08-5366)

MOHD FARHAN HAZIQ BIN HASNAN (No. K/P: 900707-14-6403)

‘AAMIRAH BINTI AZME (No. K/P: 920830-14-6490)

LOW TECK CHING (No. K/P: 791126-04-5217)

SHAFRIL HAZIZI BIN HUSAINI (No. K/P: 901227-10-5121)

AFIFAH BINTI ZAILANI (No. K/P: 881004-23-5062)

SIOW WAI LOON (No. K/P: 910601-05-5481)

MOHD ZAIHASRI BIN DOLLAH (No. K/P: 851014-02-6275)

DIYANAH BINTI MUHAMMAD SALEH @ VESAYAVEERAN (No. K/P: 901013-14-5582)

RASIDI BIN MD DEWA (No. K/P: 760927-14-5793)

MUHAMMAD AMIR AKHMAL BIN ANNUAR (No. K/P: 940905-14-6435)

MUHAMMAD AMMAR HAKIMI BIN AZMAN (No. K/P: 951108-02-5319)

NURFATIN NADIA BINTI MOHD RANUNAH (No. K/P: 850921-01-5434)

BIBI AMINAH BINTI HJ KADAVATHU ABDULLAH (No. K/P: 860425-26-5718)

MOHD HAFIZ HAIDAR BIN MOHAMAD (No. K/P: 870628-35-5229)

ALIFF BIN BURHANUDIN (No. K/P: 890416-03-5651)

NUR AMIRA BINTI SALLEH PUDIN (No. K/P: 910515-14-5608)

MOHD ‘ABQARI BIN NOOR AZMAN (No. K/P: 910607-14-5533)

YAAKOB BIN ABU BAKAR (No. K/P: 910103-03-5429)

ROSNI SYAFIKA BINTI ZAKARIA (No. K/P: 921023-03-5094)

MUHAMMAD ZAIDI BIN DAUD (No. K/P: 900908-03-6331)

MUHAMMAD SAIFUL AMBRI BIN SHOHAR (No. K/P: 920510-08-5385)

SAYA SYAIDATINA HEKMAH BT SAID SAIPOL ANUAR (No. K/P: 920307-06-5776)

SYAHIRA AZWA BINTI AHMAD (No. K/P: 941031-14-5670)

MUHAMMAD AMIR SHAHID BIN ABDULLAH (No. K/P: 940520-01-5557)

NURUL ASHIKIN BINTI HASSAN (No. K/P: 930114-14-5170)

MUHAMMAD IQMAL BIN MOKHTAR (No. K/P: 951121-10-7167)

KHAIRUNNISA BINTI MD. ESHAM (No. K/P: 950123-01-6758)

MUHAMMAD AZIM BIN JASMIN (No. K/P: 900128-01-5695)

NATASYA NABILA BINTI BAHARUDIN (No. K/P: 901021-10-5230)

MOHD. ASYRAF BIN BADRULZAMAN (No. K/P: 880218-35-5129)

RIZLIANA BT RIDZUAN (No. K/P: 881202-26-5086)

MOHD NORHAFIZ BIN MOHD SUHAIMI (No. K/P: 860716-52-5655)

MUHAMMAD AMIRUL ADLI BIN SAIDIN (No. K/P: 921123-02-5061)

NURUL AFIQAH NADZIRAH BINTI ABDUL RAHMAN (No. K/P: 950517-11-5038)

MUHAMMAD AZIMUDDIN BIN ABDUL AZIZ (No. K/P: 920119-01-6707)

NUR AMAL AQILAH BINTI MASLAN (No. K/P: 950415-11-5344)

NASHRUL IZWAN BIN ABDUL RAHMAN (No. K/P: 830526-05-5139)

ALAN KANG TIAN LOON (No. K/P: 910503-01-5179)

NORIZYANTI BINTI ISMAIL (No. K/P: 930323-01-6244)

MUHAMMAD AFIF FIKRI BIN ABD KHALID (No. K/P: 931112-10-5743)

VEGANESWARA NAIDU A/L BALAKRISHNAN (No. K/P: 920504-08-6365)

NUR HAYATI BINTI HAYAZI (No. K/P: 830505-14-5338)

NUR SHAFIQ BIN HASRUN (No. K/P: 931103-10-6293)

NURUL FATEHA BINTI ARSAD (No. K/P: 920715-06-5054)

MOHAMAD FAHMI BIN MOHAMAD NOH (No. K/P: 910409-10-5717)

JAWAGAR A/L SAMIDURAI (No. K/P: 940625-14-6799)

AHMAD SYAFIQ SAFIUDDIN BIN ROSLAN (No. K/P: 900830-11-5143)

NURUL ZETA BINTI ABU SAMAH (No. K/P: 891102-10-6028)

AHMAD FIRDAUS BIN MOHAMMAD (No. K/P: 890414-14-5697)

NUR LIYANA BINTI BAHARUM (No. K/P: 920127-14-5090)

WAN MUHAMMAD AMIRUL ADAM BIN W MAHMUD (No. K/P: 930316-06-5531)

NURUL NABILAH BINTI ZULKALNAIN (No. K/P: 931026-06-5300)

WAN AHMAD SHAH BIN WAN ABDUL RAHMAN (No. K/P: 900830-10-5885)

EZZA NUR SARA BINTI MOHAMAD SUHAIMI (No. K/P: 910104-10-5046)

MUHAMMAD AFIZH BIN MOHD ZAILANI (No. K/P: 940604-14-6597)

NURUL SYAHIRAH BINTI MOHAMMAD BAKHTIAR (No. K/P: 930520-11-5196)

SITI NADIRAH BINTI MAHADZER (No. K/P: 930418-14-5428)

MOHAMAD AMIZUL PASREEN BIN ABU BAKAK (No. K/P: 930830-10-5989)

NOOR ADLIYANA BINTI KARYADI (No. K/P: 950621-10-5016)

AMIRULLAH BIN ARIES (No. K/P: 890215-03-5495)

NURUL IZYATULIKMA BINTI YUSOFF (No. K/P: 890701-03-5714)

AHMAD HELMY BIN ZAINAL (No. K/P: 890804-86-5067)

MOHAMAD HANIFFUDDIN BIN RAMLI (No. K/P: 941206-14-6123)

PATRICIA ELIZABETH SHEPHERDSON (No. K/P: 661110-04-5276/A0520792)

PRAMALA A/P THIAGARAJ (No. K/P: 820824-08-5320)

NURULJANNAH BINTI MOHAMAD (No. K/P: 920501-13-5088)

AHMAD RASYADAN BIN ARSHAD (No. K/P: 850427-08-5367)

VECHRANI A/P HAI KIANG (No. K/P: 920115-02-5868)

FADZREEN FADZRIL BIN BAHARIN (No. K/P: 910515-08-6775)

JEEVETHA A/P TAMIL MARAN (No. K/P: 920522-08-5358)

DINESH A/L SELVANATHAN (No. K/P: 920123-08-5051)

NURUL HIDAYAH BINTI MOHAMAD SAHUDI (No. K/P: 921024-08-6782)

NG MEI PING (No. K/P: 911003-04-5026)

MOHD NORHAFIZI BIN ROHAIZAT (No. K/P: 881104-10-5409)

RAJA NOR AZRUL BIN RAJA OMAR (No. K/P: 831030-10-5119)

NUR MUNIRA BINTI ABDUL MUNIN (No. K/P: 880718-05-5368)

KAMARUL ARIFFIN BIN ABDUL RAHMAN (No. K/P: 781023-11-5577)

ZAFIRAH BINTI FADZLI (No. K/P: 871204-40-5004)

MOHD ANASSUFFIAN BIN MAT ROPI (No. K/P: 950622-11-5507)

NURUL AMALINA BINTI MOHD ALI (No. K/P: 950524-11-5650)

LIM YEE SIEW (No. K/P: 850509-10-5034)

HEO WAI MUN (No. K/P: 861014-56-5438)

TA KAI SZE (No. K/P: 860711-14-5178)

SAROVANAN A/L NALASAMY (No. K/P: 850126-01-5867)

NAVAMALA A/P KRISHNAN (No. K/P: 840322-08-6268)

NUR AKALILI BINTI MOHD AMIN (No. K/P: 900103-03-5788)

AHMAD NABIL BIN IDZHAR (No. K/P: 900622-02-5725)

DZULFIKRIE APHDZAN BIN ABD WAHAB (No. K/P: 920320-06-5447)

NURUL NADHIRAH FARHAH BINTI ARZALI (No. K/P: 961225-06-5554)

MUHAMMAD SUHAIL BIN KAMAROL BAHRIN (No. K/P: 910129-10-5923)

MAS IZZATI BINTI MASSNA SUDARMAJI (No. K/P: 950122-10-6372)

LEE PEI YI (No. K/P: 800125-14-6120)

NURALLIF BIN NORIZAN (No. K/P: 940730-14-5245)

NOR SYUHADA BINTI MOHAMED NIZAM (No. K/P: 941219-14-6990)

FARIS SYAHMI BIN OTHMAN (No. K/P: 860807-43-6279)

KAMARUL HANIF BIN KAMAL (No. K/P: 970407-14-5007)

MUHAMMAD HARITH BIN HAWARI (No. K/P: 850808-10-5737)

ZULFAA BINTI SHAHARULAZMAN (No. K/P: 950808-10-5104)

JUNID BIN TALIB (No. K/P: 821222-10-5229)

NOOR ZULIANA BINTI ZAINORDIN (No. K/P: 840909-05-5284)

MOHAMAD FAZRIEDIN BIN AZMAN (No. K/P: 910206-05-5369)

SHARIPAH ZULAIKHA BT SYED ABD KADIR (No. K/P: 910316-06-5250)

DIYANA AMALINA BINTI MAT ZELAN (No. K/P: 911223-05-5250)

MUHAMMAD AKMALLUDDIN AMIR BIN KAMARULZAMAN (No. K/P: 911224-05-5439)

IDAHWATI BINTI HJ BAHRAINI (No. K/P: 920904-14-5512)

RUPENASHWARAN A/L KOLANDAIVELU (No. K/P: 890808-14-5833)

ABDUL RAHMAN BIN HASSAN (No. K/P: 870121-06-5839)

AMIR AIZAT BIN AHMAD (No. K/P: 940308-14-5493)

NURUL SYAHIRA BINTI RAKIBUN (No. K/P: 930419-14-6158)

ABDULLAH BIN SULAIMAN (No. K/P: 861128-43-7135)

NUR AJRIYA BINTI AMRAN (No. K/P: 920627-10-5626)

MOHAMED ADIB AZIZI BIN MOHAMED AZAHARI (No. K/P: 921206-03-5847)

SHARUL HADFIZRULLAH BIN SHARJUDEEN (No. K/P: 871008-08-5867)

MUHAMMAD HAZIQ BIN SHARIM (No. K/P: 960313-10-5777)

FATIN AMIRA BINTI ANUAR (No. K/P: 920907-11-5650)

NUR NAJLAA BINTI MOHD YUSOFF (No. K/P: 901229-14-5450)

MUHAMMAD HAFIZ BIN SALMI (No. K/P: 941203-14-5889)

LAILATUL SYAHIRA BINTI ELIAS (No. K/P: 940313-14-5068)

AHMAD NABIL BIN MUHAMMAD HAIRI (No. K/P: 950624-10-5185)

NURHAKEEMA BINTI AHMAD FAUZI (No. K/P: 951206-08-6088)

KOW CHIA YEE (No. K/P: 880902-26-5402)

PUTERI MELISSA BINTI YUSOFF (No. K/P: 870407-14-5404)

ONG SEOW WEI (No. K/P: 901213-14-6766)

REDZUAN BIN ZULKIFLI (No. K/P: 871127-14-6319)

IRA KASMIRA BINTI WAB (No. K/P: 920917-06-5060)

LIM THIAM TEIK (No. K/P: 901028-14-6545)

FARAH IDAYU BINTI OTHMAN (No. K/P: 910905-14-6032)

MOHAMAD NAZRIN BIN KHALID (No. K/P: 911112-14-6205)

ASRINA BINTI SHAARI (No. K/P: 740608-14-5392)

RADZLINA BT ISMAIL (No. K/P: 700225-10-5266)

JOHAN BIN SULAIMAN (No. K/P: 890816-10-5321)

ASANTE A/P SANDERASAIDAR (No. K/P: 941013-02-5982)

MUHAMMAD NURIKHMAL BIN MD BAKIM (No. K/P: 960902-06-5419)

AIN NUR AINI BINTI ABDUL HALIM (No. K/P: 950911-10-5874)

IRFAN BIN ABDUL MUIN (No. K/P: 810606-12-5207)

KEE CHOON YONG (No. K/P: 900924-08-6769)

MOHAMED ISA BIN SAHUL HAMID (No. K/P: 830912-05-5497)

HEE CHEE CHAN (No. K/P: 950820-14-6291)

LAM JEEN MUN (No. K/P: 980812-05-5140)

SATHISWARAN A/L KRISHNAN (No. K/P: 940728-10-5975)

KRISHNAN A/L NADASEN (No. K/P: 660418-07-5127)

IRMI EMILIA BINTI AMIR (No. K/P: 850213-10-5246)

AIZAT FIKRY BIN SA’ADULLAH (No. K/P: 880713-14-5049)

NORAIN BINTI JUHARI (No. K/P: 930619-06-5248)

MOHAMAD ASRI BIN GHAZALI (No. K/P: 900607-06-5155)

MUHAMMAD IDHAN BIN ABD SHUKOR (No. K/P: 931218-06-5807)

NUR HAIZA BINTI DAROH (No. K/P: 931005-06-5328)

MUHAMMAD KHAIRUL FAIZI BIN MOHD NAWI (No. K/P: 940501-11-5659)

FARAH DAMIA BINTI RAZMI (No. K/P: 920402-06-5328)

GANESHVARAN A/L NADARAJAH (No. K/P: 810705-08-6081)

STEPHANIE KAM LAI PENG (No. K/P: 911031-14-5788)

SHAHREEN NORAZA BIN NOR AZMAN (No. K/P: 910407-11-5153)

RITA CUCU SYAMSURI (No. K/P: 881009-56-5490)

KHAIRUNNISA BINTI GHAZALI (No. K/P: 910406-06-5596)

MUHAMMAD FARHAN BIN AHMAD (No. K/P: 900129-01-5099)

MUHAMMAD HAFISZAL BIN MOHAMAD (No. K/P: 930505-06-6103)

LIM NEE YOKE (No. K/P: 750728-14-5118)

MOHD RIDZUAN BIN SAFE’AI @ SHAFIEE (No. K/P: 890424-01-5431)

CHIN KAH XIN (No. K/P: 950315-14-5394)

KHOR CHYE SIAM (No. K/P: 650719-08-6146)

CHAING SOOK YIN (No. K/P: 840124-08-6048)

LIEW MEI YEE (No. K/P: 900422-14-5386)

NURUL HIDAYAH BINTI AMRI (No. K/P: 950921-05-5428) … PLAINTIF-PLAINTIF DAN AQRS THE BUILDING COMPANY SDN. BHD. (No. Pendaftaran: 200101016783 (552540-X)) … DEFENDAN GROUNDS OF JUDGMENT (Enclosure 10) Introduction [1] This is an application by the Defendant for an extension of time to enter appearance on 29 January 2026, to set aside the Judgment in Default of Appearance (JID) dated 13 January 2026 and the Defendant is also seeking for a Stay of Execution. On 5 March 2026 this Court dismissed Enclosure 10 with the order that cost be awarded to the Plaintiffs’ counsel at RM10,000.00 subject to cost allocator. Background Facts [2] The Plaintiffs are two hundred and sixty-six (266) purchasers of condominium units of "The Lake Haven Residence" also known as “E’island”. The Lake Haven Residence is one of the projects developed by the Defendant. The Plaintiffs claimed that there was among others a delay in the handing over vacant possession of their units and started the legal action against the Defendant. The Plaintiffs served the Writ and Statement of Claim both dated 8 December 2025 on the Defendant's registered office on 11 December 2025. Following the Defendant’s failure to enter an appearance within the 14 days period, the Plaintiffs filed a Certificate of Non-Appearance on 31 December 2025. The Defendant entered appearance on 6 January 2026. Subsequently the Plaintiffs obtained a JID on 13 January 2026. [3] The JID ordered the Defendant among others to pay Liquidated Ascertained Damages (LAD) in the total amount of RM9, 186,407.17 for the delay in delivering vacant possession of the Plaintiffs’ units, the total sum of RM 3, 759,400.04 for the excess sums of the progressive release and injunctive relief such as an order for the Defendant to repair defects and for the stakeholder to release the defects deposits. The Plaintiffs’ claims can be found at Enclosures 1 and 2. [4] For clarity, the cause papers referred are as follows:

Writ Summons dated 8 December 2025 (Enclosure 1);

(ii) Statement of Claim dated 8 December 2025 (Enclosure 2);

(iii) Affidavit of Service affirmed by Kang Hoong Ning dated 29 December 2025 (Enclosure 4);

(iv) Certificate of Non-Appearance dated 31 December 2025 (Enclosure 5);

Memorandum of Appearance dated 6 January 2026 (Enclosure 8);

(vi) Judgment in Default dated 13 January 2026 (Enclosure 9);

(vii) Application Notice dated 29 January 2026 (Enclosure 10);

(viii) Affidavit in Support affirmed by Tang Choon Meng dated 20 January 2026 (Enclosure 11);

(ix) Certificate of Urgency dated 28 January 2026 (Enclosure 12);

Affidavit in Reply by the Plaintiff affirmed by Kamarul Ariffin Bin Abdul Rahman dated 6 February 2026 (Enclosure 13);

(xi) Plaintiffs’ written submission dated 20 February 2026 (Enclosure 17);

(xii) Defendants written submission dated 20 February 2026 (Enclosure 15);

(xiii) Plaintiff’s Reply written submission dated 27 February 2026 (Enclosure 19);

(xiv) Affidavit in Support by the Defendant affirmed by Tang Choon Meng dated 5 March 2026 (Enclosure 22);

(xv) Plaintiff’s Affidavit in Reply affirmed by Kamarul Ariffin Bin Abdul Rahman dated 16 March 2026 (Enclosure 23). [5] I refer to Enclosure 23 of the Plaintiffs Affidavit in Reply to the Defendant’s Affidavit in Support dated 5 March 2026 which the latter was filed on the hearing day of these applications by the Defendant. The Plaintiffs Affidavit in Reply dated 16 March 2026 was within the 14 days period following the Defendant’s Affidavit in Support. ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS Regularity of the Judgment in Default [6] I will deal with the setting aside JID application first. At the outset, the Defendant alleged that the JID was irregular, ought to be set aside and the Defendant’s defence is of merits. Conversely, the Plaintiffs’ counsel submitted that the JID was regularly obtained. [7] A number of cases have been decided for an application to set aside a JID of appearance. The Court must consider whether the Defendant has provided a satisfactory explanation for the delay in entering appearance, whether the Defendant has disclosed a defence on the merits by way of an affidavit: Lai Yoke Ngan & Anor v Chin Teck Kwee & Anor [1997] 2 MLJ 565, a Federal Court decision that was referred in the case of Ching Yik Development Sdn Bhd & Anor v Wordware Distributors (M) Sdn Bhd & Anor [2012] 10 MLJ 611, to which the Federal Court’s case of Lai Yoke (supra) relied by both counsels. [8] I also looked at the binding precedents decided by the Federal Court in the cases of Tuan Haji Ahmed Abdul Rahman v Arab-Malaysian Finance Bhd [1996] 1 MLJ 30 and Hasil Bumi Perumahan Sdn Bhd & Ors v United Malaysian Banking Bhd [1994] 1 CLJ 328. The elucidated principles are, the Court’s first duty is to determine if the JID was obtained regularly or irregularly. If the judgment is irregular then it ought to be set aside ex defitio justitiae. On the other hand, if it is regularly obtained, as decided by the Federal Court in Hasil Bumi (supra), the applicant must show that he has a defence on the merits. [9] The Defendant admitted that based on his calculation there was a delay of 8 days only and pointed out that it does not prejudice the Plaintiffs and that the JID should be set aside for the reason that the Plaintiffs claims contained reliefs which fall outside the scope of Order 13 Rules 1 to 4 of the Rules of Court 2012 (ROC 2012). The Defendant submitted that the Plaintiffs’ prayers to repair defects and ordered for the release of stakeholder monies qualify as injunctive relief and therefore these are mixed claims that ought to be heard under Order 13 Rule 6 and Order 29 of the ROC 2012. In relying on the case of Ding Laeng v KTS Sdn Bhd And Another Appeal [2017] 1 MLJ 158, the Defendant submitted that the Plaintiffs must satisfy the Court on the merits of those injunctive relief and therefore the JID is found to be irregular and should be set aside as of right (ex debito justitiae). [10] The Plaintiffs’ counsel submitted that the JID was regularly obtained. The Plaintiffs served on 11 December 2025 to the Defendants registered business address which was received by the Defendant’s company secretary (acknowledgement receipt as exhibited). The Plaintiffs submitted that the Defendant entered appearance only on 6 January 2026 which should be on the 26 December 2025, a delay of more than ten (10) days and by setting aside the JID will be prejudicial to the Plaintiffs. [11] The Court also heard from the Defendant that he did receive the Enclosures 1 & 2 on the 11 December 2025 and even mistook another date of service as 23 December 2025. It was corrected by the Plaintiffs’ counsel at the hearing of this suit that the document served on 23 December 2025 was a letter from the Plaintiffs’ counsel’s legal firm and it was not a second service of the writ summons and statement of claim. [12] The Plaintiffs argued that their mixed claims which are mainly liquidated demand and includes specific relief should be governed by the Order 13 Rule 5 of the ROC 2012. The Plaintiffs claim for the LADs are money owed based on Clause 25 of the Sale And Purchase Agreement (SPA) for the delay in the handing over vacant possession of their units. It was submitted that the claims for the excess sums are the progressive release by the Plaintiffs’ respective banks in excess of the agreed progressive amount as demanded by the Defendant to the banks. [13] The Plaintiffs’ counsel distinguished the current case from the case of Ding Laeng (supra) by submitting that in the latter, it was a defamation suit where the plaintiff in that case was claiming for unliquidated damages and injunctive relief. It was further submitted that such claims in Ding Laeng (supra) are not suitable to enter a JID as unliquidated damages require further assessment by the court and the injunctive relief require judicial evaluation of the merits before granting relief. [14] The Plaintiffs also submitted that in the event this Court finds the JID to be irregular, the part of the JID on the LAD claims are to be retained on the basis that the LAD claims are suitable and proper for a JID to be entered. [15] On the service of the cause papers, I find the Defendant failed to enter an appearance within the prescribed 14 days’ timeline which was on the 26 December 2025 (as 25 December 2025 was a public holiday). [16] I turn to the Court of Appeal case of Mahindar Singh v Amanah Saham Pahang Bhd & Anor [1984] 2 CLJ 205, which explains between unliquidated and liquidated damages, in the words of VC George (JCA): “A liquidated demand is in the nature of a debt, i.e. a specific sum of money due and payable under or by virtue of a contract. Its amount must either be already ascertained or capable of being ascertained as a mere matter of arithmetic. If the ascertainment of a sum of money, even though it be specified or named as a define figure, requires investigation beyond mere calculation, then the sum is not a ‘debt or liquidated demand’, but constitutes ‘damages’. The words “debt or liquidated demand” do not extend to unliquidated damages, whether in tort or in contract, even though the amount of such damages be named at a define figure (Knight v Abbot 10 QBD 11). ….” (emphasis added) [17] I find the Plaintiffs’ claims to be of mixed claims which are mainly liquidated demand to which in its nature a debt, as a specific sum of money is due and payable under a contract between the Plaintiffs and the Defendant. The listed LAD claims and the excess sums were already ascertained and the Defendant was fully appraised of such claims in the statement of claim, where some Plaintiffs claimed for both LAD and excess sums and some Plaintiffs claimed for excess sums only (Enclosure 2, dated 8 December 2025). The Defendant had failed or neglected to enter appearance or defence for that matter. I agree with the Plaintiffs’ counsel’s argument in distinguishing the current case from the case of Ding Laeng (supra) on the facts and law, the unliquidated damages and the injunctive relief are not suitable for a JID to be entered. Defence on the Merits [18] The Defendant further submitted that even if the JID was deemed regular, the JID may be set aside if the Defendant demonstrates a bona fide defence involving triable issues. On this point, the Defendant raised several points and will cross-refer with the Plaintiffs’ submissions. At the outset the Defendant argued that they have satisfied the requirement of raising a bona fide defence on the merits. [19] I am mindful that the onus is on the Defendant to show that he has an arguable or triable issues to be ventilated in court: Federal Court case of Lai Yoke Ngan & Anor v Chin Teck Kwee & Anor [1997] 3 CLJ 305 which was relied by both counsels. [20] The Defendant claims that the Defendant received the official approval for 320 days of extension of time from the Jabatan Perumahan Negara which would significantly impact the LAD calculations and the enforcement of the JID, and this would as argued by the Defendant, be in contradiction with the Housing Development (Control and Licensing) Act 1966. [21] The Plaintiffs submitted that the Defendant failed to deliver vacant possession and common facilities within the contractually agreed period, even after accounting for the additional extensions of time. It was submitted that the Defendant was irresponsible and failed to keep its promise to deliver the vacant possession units within the deadline which triggered the LAD entitlement, a main factor that drove 266 Plaintiffs to take legal action against the Defendant. [22] I find no record produced by the Defendant to show the purportedly official extension granted to the Defendant except for as stated in the SPA, that was changed to forty-five months. I also turned to the Federal Court case of Ang Ming Lee & Ors v Menteri Kesejahteraan Bandar, Perumahan Dan Kerajaan Tempatan & Anor And Other Appeals [2019] 6 MLRA 494, where the Federal Court ruled that the Controller of Housing (Controller) has no right to grant extension of time to developers to complete the property development projects. The Federal Court in that case found that the Controller does not have the power to waive or modify any provision in the statutorily prescribed contract of sale, and also held that the pertaining regulation relied in conferring power on the Controller to waive and modify the provisions of the SPAs, is ultra vires the Housing Development (Control and Licensing) Act 1966. I viewed that if there was an official extension granted to the Defendant, it is not allowed in law. [23] It was averred by the Defendant that some of the Plaintiffs had signed the Deeds of Assignment with their banks which prohibited the legal action against the Defendant without the bank’s written consent, raising the issue of locus standi. On this point, the Plaintiffs submitted that the issue of locus standi is not applicable as the Defendant is not privy to the Deeds of Assignment. I have to agree with the Plaintiffs’ argument that the Plaintiffs are the owners of their respective units of The Lake Haven Residence whom signed the SPA with the Defendant and rightfully have the locus standi to take a legal action against the Defendant. [24] As affirmed by the Defendant (Enclosure 22) that some Plaintiffs were offered for settlement, I find that there was no record produced by the Defendant before me. This is consistent with the argument that no settlement took place as affirmed by the Plaintiffs (Enclosure 23), where some Plaintiffs were offered a settlement by the Defendant by signing some documents however the Defendant has yet to make any payment to the Plaintiffs. [25] The Defendant submitted that the 5% defects deposit under the Defect Liability Period (DLP) of the SPA does not expire until September 2027 and by making the mandatory release of these funds would be premature under the SPA and the Housing Development (Control and Licensing) Act 1966. [26] The Plaintiffs argued that the claim for the release of the 5% defect deposit is provided in the SPA, to enable the Plaintiffs to proceed with the rectification of the defects as the Defendant failed to take any measure to rectify. The Plaintiffs also claimed that the Defendant had taken the Plaintiffs’ money which they had invested heavily on their units and had suffered loss due to the delay in handing over and the units are found to be not habitually safe. [27] I refer to Clause 30 of the SPA which is the DLP clause as submitted by the Defendant (Enclosure 15). Reading clause 30 paragraph (1) of the SPA in one breath, it is stated that any defect in the parcel (which refers to the units of the Plaintiffs) or the said building or the common property which becomes apparent within twenty-four (24) months after the date the purchaser takes vacant possession, shall be repaired and made good by the developer (the Defendant in this case) at its own cost and expense, within thirty days the Defendant received the written notice from the Plaintiffs. [28] Paragraph (1) of Clause 30 clearly stated that the Defendant shall repair and make good of the defects at its own cost and expense upon notification. Clause 30 must be read in total, the DLP does not stop at paragraph (1) of Clause 30. Emphasis below is added for easy reference. [29] Clause 30 paragraph (2) stated that, “If the said defect, shrinkage or other faults in the said Parcel or the said Building or the said common property have not been made good by the Developer within thirty (3) days referred to in subclause (1), the Purchaser shall be entitled to carry out the works to repair and make good such defect, shrinkage or other faults himself and to recover from the Developer the costs of repairing and making good the same and the Purchaser may deduct such costs from any sum which has been held by the Developer’s solicitors as stakeholders under item 5 of the Third Schedule, provided that the Purchaser shall, at any time after the expiry of the period of thirty (30) days, notify the Developer of the costs of repairing and making good such defect, shrinkage or other faults before the commencement of the works and shall give the Developer an opportunity to carry out the works himself within thirty (30) days from the date the Purchaser has notified the Developer of his intention to carry out the works as soon as practicable after the Developer’s failure to carry out the works within the said thirty (30) days. In such an event, the Developer’s solicitors shall release such costs to the Purchaser from the stakeholder sum held by the Developer’s solicitors under item 5 of the Third Schedule within thirty (30) days after the receipt by the Developer’s solicitors of the Purchaser’s written demand specifying the amount of such costs.” [30] Subparagraph (3) of Clause 30 of the SPA stated that, “(3) Subject to subclause (2), where the Purchaser has, before the expiry of the period eight (8) months or twenty-four (24) months after the date the Purchaser takes vacant possession of the said Parcel as set out in items 5(a) and (b) of the Third Schedule, respectively, duly served on the Developer’s solicitors a copy of the written notice from the Purchaser to the Developer under subclause

to rectify the defect, shrinkage or other faults in the said Parcel or the said Building or the common facilities, the Developer’s solicitors shall not release to the Developer the relevant sum held by the Developer’s solicitors as stakeholders under item 5(a) or (b) of the Third Schedule, as the case may be, until the Developer’s solicitors shall have received a certificate signed by the Developer’s architect certifying that such defect, shrinkage or other faults in the said Parcel or the said Building and the said common facilities have been repaired and make good by the Developer.” [31] I do not refer to paragraph (4) of Clause 30 as I find them not relevant to the argument on the claim for defect deposit. I viewed that based on clause 30 paragraphs (1), (2) and (3) of the SPA, when the defect or shrinkage or other faults in the unit or building or common property becomes apparent within the 24 months, it does not mean that the Defendant is only to take rectification measures after the twenty-four (24) months period. This is consistent with subparagraph (3) of Clause 30 first sentence which allows the Plaintiffs to notify the Defendant in writing to rectify the defects before the expiry of the period of eight (8) or twenty-four (24) months after taking vacant possession. [32] Subparagraph (2) of Clause 30 stated that it must be rectified first by the Defendant on its own expense and cost. It also stated that only if the Defendant failed to rectify after the thirty (30) days’ notice given by the Plaintiffs, the Plaintiffs may proceed to rectify by claiming from the Defendant the defects deposit before commencing with rectification works. [33] Based on the Plaintiffs’ Enclosure 13 and Enclosure 23, in particular the evidence of exchanged mobile text messages between the Plaintiffs and the Defendant (exhibit KAM-1), revealed that the Defendant’s reaction was far from being helpful in rectifying the defects. In addition, exhibit KAM-2 in Enclosure 23 showed that the defects are still apparent. [34] I viewed that the facts and the law are that the rectification works are to be carried out before the expiry of the twenty-four months period. Clause 30 of the SPA allows the Plaintiffs to proceed to rectify by claiming from the Defendant the defects deposit before commencing with rectification works. I am also of the view that the defects deposits are not part of the Defendant’s cash flow as it was not spelled out as such in the SPA. Based on the reasons and findings above, it is of the view that the Defendant’s defence are without merits. Stay of Execution [35] On this point, the principle as stated in the case of Kosma Palm Oil Mill Sdn Bhd v Koperasi Serbausaha Makmur Bhd [2004] 1 MLJ 257 by the Federal Court, both relied by the Plaintiffs and the Defendant, provides that the onus is on the applicant to show the existence of special circumstances to justify the grant of a stay of execution. Pursuant to Order 45 rule 11 of the ROC 2012, the circumstances would mean the supervening or special circumstances that arise after judgment which may occasion an injustice on the party whom had been given the judgment. [36] Briefly, the Defendant submitted that if the stay is not granted, the Defendant’s appeal even if successful, would be rendered nugatory. It was the Defendant’s contention that if the JID is executed, the Defendant would face extreme difficulty in recovering the funds should the judgment later be overturned. The Defendant further submitted that the stakeholding sums may be utilized, transferred or dissipated and reiterated on the premature resorted claims as the expiry of the DLP will be on 3 September 2027. It was submitted that by releasing the stakeholding sums with an irregular JID that ought to be set aside, constitutes special circumstances to grant a stay. [37] The Plaintiffs on the other hand briefly submitted that the Defendant’s contention to set aside the JID is not of special circumstances which is against the principle and the law under Order 45 rule 11 of the ROC 2012. It was also argued that there should not be any risk of dissipation of the funds unless the funds had been mismanaged by the Defendant. [38] I viewed that the Defendant’s argument on the difficulty to recover the ascertained sums from the Plaintiffs is not of special circumstances that warrant for a stay of execution. The Defendant as a licensed developer for The Lake Haven Residence has the contractual obligation as well as the statutory obligation under the Housing Development (Control and Licensing) Act 1966. The intention of the Parliament is clear, that is to protect the Plaintiffs by providing the avenues for the LAD claims and the defect deposits. By granting a stay, will be prejudicial to the Plaintiffs. Cases Referred: Lai Yoke Ngan & Anor v Chin Teck Kwee & Anor [1997] 2 MLJ 565 Ching Yik Development Sdn Bhd & Anor v Wordware Distributors (M) Sdn Bhd & Anor [2012] 10 MLJ 611 Tuan Haji Ahmed Abdul Rahman v Arab-Malaysian Finance Bhd [1996] 1 MLJ 30 Hasil Bumi Perumahan Sdn Bhd & Ors v United Malaysian Banking Bhd [1994] 1 CLJ 328 Teh Kim Seng & Anor v Tenaga Nasional Berhad [2020] CLJU 903 Ding Laeng v KTS Sdn Bhd And Another Appeal [2017] 1 MLJ 158 Mahindar Singh v Amanah Saham Pahang Bhd & Anor [1984] 2 CLJ 205 Lai Yoke Ngan & Anor v Chin Teck Kwee & Anor [1997] 3 CLJ 305 Ang Ming Lee & Ors v Menteri Kesejahteraan Bandar, Perumahan Dan Kerajaan Tempatan & Anor And Other Appeals [2019] 6 MLRA 494 Kosma Palm Oil Mill Sdn Bhd v Koperasi Serbausaha Makmur Bhd [2004] 1 MLJ Jaya Harta Realty Sdn Bhd v Koperasi Kemajuan Pekerja-Pekerja Ladang Bhd [2000] 6 MLJ 493 Act/Law Referred: Order 13 Rules 1 to 4, O 13 R 5, O 13 R 6, O 29 & O 45 R 11 of the Rules of Court 2012 Housing Development (Control and Licensing) Act 1966