Lim & Hoh, solicitors for petitioner is instructed to apply to court for default judgment or trial

Yap Chong Yee
30th July, 2007

M/s Lim & Hoh, solicitors,
Ming Building,
Jln. Bukit Nanas, KL.

Dear Sirs,

Re Lim Choi Yin Vs McLarens Sdn. Bhd..

I wish to inform Mr David Hoh, my wife’s counsel, that he is NOT TO ACCEPT IF OFFERED BY RESPONDENTS, ANY RETURN OF HER Rm.60,000 paid by her pursuant to a court order awarded to Respondents for security for costs.

The reason for my advice is set out in detail in my fax that is sent as an annex to this letter; or you can read it posted on blogg, http://www.yapchongyee.blogspot.com.

Yours truly,


yapchongyee@yahoo.com.au


I had faxed the above instruction to our solicitors on 30th July, and I later instructed M/s Lim & Hoh to apply for either a default judgment or to set our petition for hearing on the grounds that Judge Zainon binti Mohd. Ali’s Order to strike out is unenforceable. I had drafted the affidavit for my wife’s affirmation and sent it to our solicitors for their consideration and amendment out of respect for them as our solicitors; but to date there had not been any response.

I have net been able to speak to Mr David Hoh, our counsel and therefore I asked to speak to Mr Frank Hoh, who told me that I am to speak to Mr David Hoh. I told him that I am unable to contact Mr David Hoh; and that IF THIS SITUATION CONTINUES I WILL HAVE TO COMMUNICATE WITH THEM THROUGH MY BLOGG. He told to do what I pleased. I therefore is forced to post all my instructions and other communication through this blogg.


I post the draft of the affidavit that I want to form the foundation of my wife’s application for the relief sought therein. I will post my supporting affidavit that will support my wife’s application in a follow up posting. Among the issues that I will discuss is the NATURE OF THE UNENFORCEABLE COURT ORDER THAT APPROVED THE RESPONDENT STEPHEN LIM CHENG BAN’S APPLICATION FOR AN ORDER TO STRIKE OUT PETITION.

My argument is that the order to strike out approved to Stephen Lim Cheng Ban AFTER THE PAYMENT OF RM.60,000 amounts to Judge Zainon binti Mohd. Ali ABETTING STEPHEN LIM TO OBTAIN MONEY BY FALSE PRETENSES AND TO AID AND ABET STEPHEN LIM TO OBTAIN MONEY BY FRAUD; because there was no intention in Judge Zainon binti Mohd. Ali to ALLOW THE PETITION TO PROGRESS WHATSOEVER. My whole submission is reduced to the question, NOW THAT BOTH ORDERS ARE ALIVE & KICKING, what is the nature of the Rm.60,000 that is paid by order of judge Zainon binti Mohd. Ali into the hands of the 6 respondents, NOW THAT THERE IS NO COURT HEARING OF THE
PETITION ? As is evident my wife is not going to accept the return of the Rm.60,000 WHATSOEVER ! Respondents have taken THE CAKE AND EATEN IT AS WELL.

My wife’s DRAFT SUPPORTING AFFIDAVIT :


DALAM MAHKAMAH TINGGI DI KUALA LUMPUR
( BAHAGIAN DAGANG )
PETISYEN PEMULA NO: D2-26-41 TAHUN 2001

Dalam perkara McLaren Saksama (Malaysia) Sdn Bhd (nama lamanya) dikenali sebagai Relionus Adjusters Sdn Bhd)
Dan
Dalam Perkara Seksyen 181 Akta Syarikat, 1965
Dan
Dalam perkara Aturan 88 Kaedah-Kaedah Mahkamah Tinggi , 1980


Antara

Lim Choi Yin ...Pempetisyen

Dan

1. Mc Laren Saksama (Malaysia) Sdn Bhd
2. Wong Kem Chen (No. K/P: 500807-06-5077)
3. Stephen Lim Cheng Ban (No. K/P: 3912914)
4. Leong Yee Fook (No. K/P: 560727-10-5651)
5. Lum Siew Wai (No. K/P: 4734145) ... Responden-
6. Haris Onn bin Hussein Onn (No. K/P: 661124-10-5727) Responden


AFFIDAVIT

Saya, LIM CHOI YIN (dulunya memegang Malaysia No. K/P: 4840999) dan sekarang seorang warganegara Australia yang memegang Pasport Australia No. L0030383 (dimana nama saya dinyatakan sebagai Yap Choi Yin mengikut surname suami saya) dan mempunyai alamat tinggal saya di 5A, Prinsep Road, Attadale (Perth) WA 6156 Australia sesungguhnya berikrar dan menyatakan seperti berikut :-

(1)ACCORDING to the facts deposed by me and also pleaded in my petition my statements are SET OUT FROM paragraph (2) below & onwards; and further IN ACCORDANCE with the rule in the COURT OF APPEAL case of Kelapa Sawit (Telok Anson) Sdn. Bhd. v. Yeoh Kim Leng (1990)CSLR; [1991] 1 MLJ 301; for Judge Zainon binti Mohd. Ali to have the JUDICIAL POWERS in the circumstances of my petition, TO STRIKE OUT SAID PETITION, respondent Stephen Lim Cheng Ban must prove by evidence in court the following 2 FACTS :
(a)that 2nd respondent WONG KEM CHEN was a share holder of M/s Relionus Adjusters Sdn. Bhd. (the original name of 1st respondent at the time of registration); BY EVIDENCE of the existence of the Company Resolution authorizing M/s Relionus Adjusters Sdn. Bhd. to issue to WONG KEM CHEN any such shares;
(b)to prove in accordance with rules of evidence required by the law of evidence, THE EXISTENCE OF Stephen Lim Cheng Ban’s allegation that I held combined shares of 3001 shares in 1st respondent company, UNDER SHARE CERTIFICATES No. “2” & “4”

Judge Zainon binti Mohd. Ali in breach of her duty as the presiding Judge DID NOT REQUIRE PROOF OF the above (a) & (b) and she similarly, in breach of her duty REFUSED TO GIVE ME LEAVE TO CROSS EXAMINE Stephen Lim Cheng Ban for PERJURY. .

(2)I, Yap Choi Yin the Petitioner had pleaded to the following facts in my petition and my supporting affidavits in reply to the several affidavits deposed by the respondents Kwong Sea Yoon, Wong kem Chen & Stephen Lim Cheng Ban in reply to my petition :-
(a)that at all times, from the time of registration of said 1st Respondent Company(M/s Relionus Adjusters Sdn. Bhd., now known as McLarens Saksama Sd, Bhd., hereinafter refered to as the said 1st Respondent) through to today, 1st Respondent had but only two share holders directors & promoters, namely Stephen Lim Cheng Ban & myself, Yap Choi Yin ;
(b)that at all times, said 1st Respondent Company had never ever held any company meeting whatsoever.
(c )that at all times whatsoever, I had never ever signed any transfer form for the purpose of transferring my sole promoter’s share in said 1st Respondent Company,
(d)that at all times whatsoever, Wong Kem Chen was never ever a share holder nor a director of said 1st respondent Company,
(e)that at all times I had never ever sold nor in any way whatsoever, cause the transfer of my sole promoter’s share in said 1st respondent Company,
(f)that neither Stephen Lim Cheng Ban nor I, Yap Choi Yin was ever issued with any share certificate in 1st Respondent Company. There were NO share certificates issued by said 1st Respondent Company ever.
(g)that all the allegations that were alleged by Stephen Lim Cheng Ban in his supporting Affidavits alleging that I had sold my several thousand shares in said 1st Respondent Company are/were lies and the alleged documents annexed to his affidavit dated 17th, September, 2004, and supporting his application for an order for striking out said petition were fabrications by Stephen Lim Cheng Ban.

(3)I solemnly state the following facts relating to the adjudication of said petition before, YAB. Judge Dato Zainon binti Mohd. Ali :
(a) Respondents first applied to Judge Zainon bimti Mohd. Ali for an order FOR SECURITY FOR COSTS, and the learned Judge approved Respondents’ application; and she awarded to respondents security for costs in the sum of Rm.60,000, which was duly paid by me as petitioner.
(b) Upon my complete payment of said sum of Rm.60,000, Respondent Stephen Lim Cheng Ban followed up said payment of said Rm.60,000 BY A SECOND and subsequent application for an order for striking out of petition as showing no cause of action. The presiding Judge Zainon binti Mohd. Ali went on and approved this second application AS WELL and ordered that said petition be struck out in terms; notwithstanding that her first order awarding to respondent SECURITY FOR COSTS which was duly paid into the hands of respondents was still alive. No application by respondents to set aside ORDER FOR SECURITY FOR COSTS and Judge Zainon binti Mohd. Ali did not at anytime set aside said security for costs;
(c) For reasons as submitted by my counsel, and as set out in detail in the submission ANNEXED HEREIN and marked “SUBMISSION”, Judge Zainon binti Mohd. Ali’s 2nd ORDER AWARDING to respondent Stephen Lim Cheng Ban leave to strike out said petition is UNENFORCEABLE.

RELIEF SOUGHT BY PETITIONER :
(1)that petitioner be allowed to set the petition down for trial pursuant to the order awarded to respondents and since petitioner has already paid in full and in time said Rm.60,000 on the terms of Judge Zainon binti Mohd. Ali’s order awarding security for costs to respondents.
(2)alternatively that petitioner be given leave to enter default judgment, because 1st Respondent had abandoned it’s defence upon the failure of Mr Kwong Sea Yoon, as representative of 1st Respondent Company, had failed to further participate in the progress of this petition for the last 7 years and Mr Kwong had since those 7 years has not participated in the defence of the 1st Respondent Company.
(3)that the application of Mr Stephen Lim Cheng Ban, said 3rd respondent, for leave to strike out said petition be set down for hearing as 3rd Party action against Petitioner.


DALAM MAHKAMAH TINGGI DI KUALA LUMPUR
( BAHAGIAN DAGANG )
PETISYEN PEMULA NO: D2-26-41 OF 2001

Dalam perkara McLaren Saksama (Malaysia) Sdn Bhd (nama lamanya) dikenali sebagai Relionus Adjusters Sdn Bhd)
Dan
Dalam Perkara Seksyen 181 Akta Syarikat, 1965
Dan
Dalam perkara Aturan 88 Kaedah-Kaedah Mahkamah Tinggi , 1980

Antara

Lim Choi Yin ...Pempetisyen
Dan

1. Mc Laren Saksama (Malaysia) Sdn Bhd
2. Wong Kem Chen (No. K/P: 500807-06-5077)
3. Stephen Lim Cheng Ban (No. K/P: 3912914)
4. Leong Yee Fook (No. K/P: 560727-10-5651)
5. Lum Siew Wai (No. K/P: 4734145) ... Responden-
6. Haris Onn bin Hussein Onn (No. K/P: 661124-10-5727) Responden


Diikrarkan oleh LIM CHOI YIN di , Australia ]
pada haribulan 2007 pada pukul pagi/petang ]
melalui terjemahan Lee Bee Bee dari Bahasa Malaysia ke ]
ke Bahasa Inggeris setelah mula-mula sekali berikrar bahawa dia ]
telah dengan sebenarnya dengan nyatanya dan dengan dan dapat ]
didengar menterjemahkan isi kandungan afidavitnya kepada ]
deponen LIM CHOI YIN dan bahawa dia akan sebenarnya dan ]
jujurnya menterjemahkannya yang sedang hendak dikendalikan ]
keatas dirinya LIM CHOI YIN yang tersebut itu ]
--------------------------------------
LIM CHOI YIN


Di hadapan Saya





--------------------------------------------------
Kounsel Malaysia / Nortari Awam


AFIDAVIT JAWAPAN LIM CHOI YIN (Membatalkan) ini diikrarkan dan difailkan pada oleh Tetuan Lim & Hoh, Peguamcara bagi pihak Pempetisyen yang mempunyai alamat penyampaiannya di #08-02, Tingkat 8, Bangunan Ming, Jalan Bukit Nanas,50250 Kuala Lumpur
(Tel : 03 207 23113) (Fax : 03 207 80906) (Ruj : DH/1110.2/LCY/MS(M)SB) (No Perkataan : )