Content
WA-22NCC-142-03/2025 Kand. 25/11/2025 15:29:05 IN THE HIGH COURT OF MALAYA AT KUALA LUMPUR IN THE FEDERAL TERRITORY, MALAYSIA (COMMERCIAL DIVISION) CIVIL SUIT NO.: WA-22NCC-142-03/2025 BETWEEN PRISMAWORLD EMBASSYVIEW SDN BHD ... PLAINTIFF (COMPANY NO.: 199501017807 (347010-T) AND 1. TANAH BAYUMAS SDN BHD [COMPANY NO.: 202401028901 (1574749-A)] 2. ADAM PRIMUS VARGHESE BIN ABDULLAH [NRIC NO.: 550131-08-5849] MACPHERSON SIMON [NRIC NO.: 830308-13-6071] FROM ADAMPRIMUS & CO. PLT [202306000018 (LLP0035785-LCA)] (AS RECEIVERS AND MANAGERS OF PRISMAWORLD EMBASSYVIEW SDN BHD) t S/N AtMRMzAg8Uy3juD 1/f5fA ; 3. RHB BANK BERHAD ...DEFENDANTS [COMPANY NO.: 196501000373 (6171-M)] GROUNDS OF JUDGMENT (ENCLOSURE 15 — 3 Defendant’s Application to Strike Out (ENCLOSURE 17 — 2"? Defendant’s (Receives Managers) Application to Strike Out) (ENCLOSURE 33 — 1 Defendant’s Application to Strike Out) Decision not to allow Striking Out 1. | The Defendants have all sought to strike out the Statement of Claim and the Writ of Summons filed by the Plaintiff against them. 2. The Defendants suggest that the Plaintiff does not have any valid cause of action against any of them and that this is a plain and obviously unsustainable case that ought to be struck out under Order 18 rule 19 of the Rules of Court. t S/N AtMRMzAg8Uy3juD 1/f5fA ; 3. This Court finds that the claim levelled against them should be heard by way of a trial. The mere fact that the claim may not be strong, does not on its own justify striking out this claim. 4. This decision is also based on the earlier decision of this Court that finds that there exist several issues that ought to be determined namely:- (i) | whether the Sale and Purchase Agreement entered between the Receivers and Managers (2 Defendant) and the 1 Defendant is valid and enforceable in view of the Judicial Management Application. (ii) if the said Sale and Purchase Agreement is invalid whether the Plaintiff is entitled to claim damages for any alleged breach of Section 410 of the Companies Act. (iii) | whether the Plaintiff has locus standi to challenge the validity of the Sale and Purchase Agreement. (iv) whether the Plaintiff has shown any form of misconduct on the part of the Receivers and Managers or by the 3% Defendant in pursuing the sale of the said property in accordance with the principles of law laid down by the Court of Appeal in Score S/N AtMRMzAg8Uy3juD 1/f5fA Option Sdn Bhd & Anor v Duar Tuan Kiat & Ors [2013] 5 MLJ 716 and Simpang Empat Plantation Sdn Bhd v Ali Tan Sri Abdul Kadir [2006] 1 CLJ 41 (v) whether the Defendants had conspired to cause damage to the Plaintiff by forcing the sale of the said property in question at an alleged undervalue if any wrong was committed as claimed in the Statement of Claim. (vi) whether the 3rd Defendant had caused the Plaintiff to lose the right to redeem the property. (vii) whether the actions of the 2"¢ Defendant is attributable to the 3 Defendant despite the terms of the agreements that indicate that the Receivers and Managers are agents of the company / plaintiff as the Plaintiff has sought to redeem the property via a private sale to a proposed buyer at a higher price. 5. This Court had earlier found that the claim does show a reasonable cause of action as alleged against the Defendants for breach of section 410 of the Companies Act. However, this Court declined to grant the Injunction sought, as damages would be more than S/N AtMRMzAg8Uy3juD 1/f5fA ; adequate to compensate the Plaintiff for any alleged wrong. This issue, however, will have to be determined at trial if any wrongdoing is shown against the Defendants. As such, | cannot summarily dismiss the claim against the Defendants as prayed for by the Defendants. 6. Therefore, it cannot be said that this is a plain and obviously unsustainable case justifying the striking out of the claim against the Defendants. 7. As such, | dismiss the above Enclosures prayed for by the said Defendants with costs in the cause. Dated 19'° November, 2025 (DATO’ IN A MOHD ARIEF EMRAN BIN ARIFIN) JUDGE HIGH COURT OF MALAYA KUALA LUMPUR NCC 5 FEDERAL TERRITORY OF KUALA LUMPUR t S/N AtMRMzAg8Uy3juD 1/f5fA Counsel: For the Plaintiff For the 1 Defendant For the 2 Defendant : For the 3% Defendant S/N At(MRMzAg8Uy3juD1/f5fA Dato’ Malik Imtiaz together with Wong Chooi Mey and Juey Tan Juan Xing Messrs. C.M Wong & Denise Chong Rabindra S Nathan together with Seh Zhen Yang and Nurul Hafizah Melan Messrs. Shearn Delamore & Co. Saritha Devi together with Nur Nabila Rosdi Messrs. Firoz Julian Sean Yeow together with Andrew Chew Messrs. Lee Hishammuddin Allen & Gledhill