JUDGMENT
A. Introduction
[1] The sole issue in this appeal is whether leave of Court is required for the commencement of proceedings against a Court-appointed liquidator.
[2] The long-established position in this jurisdiction is that leave is obtained from the winding-up Court prior to such commencement. However, in two recent decisions, namely Kao Che Jen v. N Chanthiran Nagappan [2016] 1 MLRA 218 ('Kao Che Jen') and the instant appeal, the Court of Appeal has departed from this long-established position. It is therefore incumbent upon this Court to clarify the relevant legal principles in this regard.
B. Background Facts
[3] The respondent, Kao Che Jen is a contributory and director ('the Contributory') of one STM Transformers Sdn Bhd ('the Company'). On 9 May 2013, one Ong Jin Ek, another contributory of the Company, filed a petition to wind up the Company on just and equitable grounds pursuant to s 218(1)(i) of the Companies Act 1965 ('the 1965 Act'). The Company was consequently wound up by the High Court in Kuching on 21 June 2013. The appellant, N.Chanthiran A/L Nagappan was appointed as the Company's liquidator ('the Liquidator').
[4] Over the years, the Contributory has initiated a series of proceedings against the Liquidator seeking, among others, to remove the Liquidator and to compel him to produce the Company's documents and accounts. Having been unsuccessful in all of those proceedings, the Contributory commenced another action against the Liquidator in the Kuching High Court, which has culminated in the present appeal. However, the Contributory did not obtain leave of Court prior to commencing these proceedings and as stated earlier, this comprises the basis for the entire appeal.
C. The High Court
[5] The present appeal arose from an application by the Contributory dated 6 April 2018, where the Contributory claimed that the Liquidator had failed to perform his duties and accordingly sought a Court order to compel the Liquidator to do the following: