ENCLOSURE:

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MALAYA AT KUALA LUMPUR

IN THE WILAYAH PERSEKUTUAN, MALAYSIA

(CIVIL DIVISION)

CIVIL SUIT NO. S-22NCVC-943-10/2021

BETWEEN

MAHMET OMER …
PLAINTIFF
(PASSPORT NO.: A54230986)

AND

FAKIR BIN FAHMI

(NRIC NO.: 880907-14-2553)

FLY SDN BHD …DEFENDANTS

(COMPANY NO.: 167131-V)

EX PARTE NOTICE OF APPLICATION

LET ALL THE PARTIES CONCERNED attend before the Judge/Registrar in

Chambers/Open Court on the day of at a.m/p.m on the hearing
of an application on the part of the Plaintiff under Order 29 Rule 1 and Order 32 Rule 1 of the
Rules of Court 2012 for orders as stated:-

a. A Mareva injunction to be granted to restrain the Defendant whether by itself, its

servants or agents or nominees or otherwise howsoever from removing out of the
jurisdiction of the Court, selling, disposing of, charging, pledging, transferring,
dissipating and/or otherwise dealing with its assets or assets held in the name of the
Defendant controlled by it within the jurisdiction insofar as the same do not exceed
the sum RM 500,000.00 including and in particular:-
i. Monies held in Bank Megah bearing the address of No 2A-1, Jalan Maju
7/1, 53000, Wangsa Maju, Kuala Lumpur.
 ii. A piece of land amounting to RM2,100,000.00 bearing the address of
iii. a shop lot bearing the address No.1, Jalan Besar, Wangsa Maju, Kuala
Lumpur
iv. 210,000 shares held in Fly Sdn Bhd

or attempting to take any steps to remove the same out of the jurisdiction until the trial of this
action and for the Defendant to disclose the value, nature, and whereabouts of all the assets
owned beneficially by it, whether in its own name or in the names of the companies
controlled or directed by it or otherwise howsoever.;

b. Cost of this application; and

c. Any further and/or other relief that this Honourable Court shall deem fit and just.

The grounds of the application are as follows:

1. The Plaintiff has a good arguable case against the Defendant as the Defendant had
committed misrepresentation which induced the Plaintiff to remit RM500,000.00 to
be utilised as part payment for a piece of land for the Plaintiff’s factory that to be
registered in the joint names of the Plaintiff and the Defendant for RM2,100,000.00.

2. The Defendant has assets within the jurisdiction as monies amounting to

RM500,000.00…

3. There is a real risk that the Defendant will remove its assets out of the jurisdiction or
dispose the assets within the jurisdiction before the Judgment is satisfied due to
nefarious activities carried out by the Defendant.

The detailed grounds of this application are as appears in the Affidavit in Support affirmed
on 31 May 2021.
st

Dated this day of , 2021

 ..................................................................
.
Registrar

High Court at Kuala Lumpur

This EX PARTE NOTICE OF APPLICATION is filed by …, Solicitors for the Plaintiff

whose registered address is at Suite 2, AL 704, Academic Building 2, Faculty of Law,
Universiti Teknologi MARA, 40450 Shah Alam, Selangor Darul Ehsan.

(Ref. No.: M/CJ/052021/01)

ENCLOSURE:

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MALAYA AT KUALA LUMPUR

IN THE WILAYAH PERSEKUTUAN, MALAYSIA
(CIVIL DIVISION)
CIVIL SUIT NO. S-22NCVC-943-10/2021

BETWEEN

MAHMET …PLAINTIFF
(COMPANY NO: 950526-W)

AND

FAKIR …DEFENDANT
(COMPANY NO: 772235-D)
 AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF
APPLICATION UNDER ORDER 29 RULE 1(2A)

I, ….(NRIC NO.: 970710-14-6192), a Malaysian citizen of full age and with an office
address at ….. and annexed hereto and marked as Exhibit “” is a certified true copy of my
Identification Card, do make oath and say as follows:-

1. I am the solicitor and am duly authorized to affirm this Affidavit for and on behalf of
the Plaintiff in this application, Mahmet.
2. I make this affidavit to the best of my personal knowledge, information and belief
based on all the facts known to me personally or derived from documents and records
to which I have full access and obtained through investigations conducted by the
Plaintiff.

3. This affidavit is filed in support of an Originating Summons dated 1.4.2011 (“OS”)

and a Summons in Chambers dated 1.4.2011, which is an application for a Mareva
injunction.
4. The Plaintiff, MAHMET (PASSPORT NO.: ) is a Turkish citizen of full age with a
residing address at Isfahan
5. The Defendant, FAKIR (NRIC NO.: 880907-14-2553) is a Malaysian citizen of full
age with an office address at…..
6. The Defendant is at all material times, a director and a shareholder of Fly Sdn Bhd, a
company incorporated under the Companies Act 2016 and having its registered
address at……… A certified true copy of the Defendant’s company’s Certificates of
Incorporation is annexed hereto and marked as Exhibit “”
7. I state that the Plaintiff is seeking the relief of Mareva injunction pending the
Plaintiff’s application for recovery of part payment for a land to restrain the
Defendant from uplifting, transferring, disposing, removing and/or dissipating the
monies totalling RM500,000.00.

RELEVANT FACTS

8. On 30.4.2021, the Plaintiff requested the assistance from the Defendant to find a
suitable land for him to set up a factory in Kuala Lumpur.
9. The Defendant induced the Plaintiff to remit to him a sum of RM500,000.00 to
purchase the land and to obtain pioneer status of the factory.
10. The Plaintiff deposited RM500,000.00 to the Defendant in a bank account with Bank
Megah in Wangsa Maju, to be utilised by the Defendant as part payment for the land
and for the land to be registered in the joint names of the Plaintiff and the Defendant.

GOOD ARGUABLE CASE

11. I verily believe that there is a good arguable case against the Defendant wherein there
was a misrepresentation on part of the Defendant as the Plaintiff was induced into
believing that the RM500,000.00 transferred to the Defendant would be used as part
payment for the land that would be registered in the joint names of the Plaintiff and
the Defendant.
12. It is within my personal knowledge and belief that the Defendant had
misappropriate the money remitted by the Plaintiff for the purpose of buying the land
 and registering it in the name of the Defendant’s company, Fly Sdn Bhd, where he
acting as the director of the company.

RESPONDENT HAVING ASSETS WITHIN THE COURT’S JURISDICTION

REAL RISK OF DISSIPATION OF ASSETS

There is a real risk of dissipation of assets and/or monies in the time deposits maintained by
Third Respondent and managed by the First Respondent as the director and shareholder of
Second Respondent and Third Respondent.

The Plaintiff contends that the Defendant’s conduct induced the Plaintiff into believing that
the land would be registered jointly under their names which led the Plaintiff to remit the
money to the Defendant shows dishonesty as Hence, the Plaintiff submits that there is a clear
risk of dissipation of assets and the Defendant would default in settling any Judgment
obtained by the Plaintiff.

THE INJUNCTION APPLICATION

I verily believe that upon having knowledge that the Plaintiff would be claiming for damages
for the misrepresentation and to recover RM500,000.00 against the Defendant and upon
payment made by the Plaintiff, the Defendant had moved out the funds to its holding
company, Fly Sdn Bhd so as to put it out of reach of the Plaintiff in the event of the Plaintiff
obtaining any judgment against the Defendant.

2. I have reason to believe that the Defendant, directly or indirectly, is endeavouring to

sell or otherwise dispose of assets belonging to the company by moving the funds to
another company, namely Fly Sdn Bhd.

3. In all circumstances, I verily believe that unless a Mareva injunction is granted in

appropriate terms against the Defendant there is a real risk that any judgment obtained
by the Plaintiff against the Defendant would remain unsatisfied.

4. I verily believe that I am not aware of any similar ex parte application made in
relation to this claim that has been made to any other judges in any court within
Malaysia.

5. I also verily believe that the application of a Mareva Injunction should be made on an
ex-parte basis due to the urgency of the matter as the Defendant may dispose his
assets outside of the jurisdiction of Malaysia.
 6. I am duly authorised by the Plaintiff to give an undertaking and I do hereby give an
undertaking to abide by any order that this Honourable Court may make as to
damages in the case the Defendant should suffer any loss by reasons of this Order.

7. The Plaintiff humbly prays for the Honourable Court to grant the Plaintiff’s
application for a Mareva injunction to restrain the Defendants from disposing,
removing or otherwise dissipating his assets up to the amount of RM 500,000.00.

To an affidavit by one deponent )

)
(NRIC NO: 800617– 03 –5541) )
Sworn on )
at ) …………………………..

Before me,

.........................................................
Commissioner for Oath

This AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF APPLICATION UNDER ORDER 29 RULE 1(2A)

is filed by ... Solicitors for the Plaintiff whose registered address is at Suite 2, AL 704,
Academic Building 2, Faculty of Law, Universiti Teknologi MARA, 40450 Shah Alam,
Selangor Darul Ehsan.

(Ref. No.: MAC/MI/201602/MR)