By Shikin Louis
KUCHING, Sept 28: The High Court here has delayed for a second time the delivery of its ruling on Dato Sri Mahmud Abu Bekir Taib’s bid to obtain and inspect Cahya Mata Sarawak Bhd (Cahya Mata) accounting and other records.
The ruling, which was initially scheduled for last Friday (Sept 25), was again not delivered today as the judge needed more time to prepare her decision.
Abu Bekir’s counsel Satinder Sandhu confirmed that the postponement was due to the ruling not being ready and was not requested by either party.
“The ruling is not ready, so she needed more time,” Sandhu told reporters outside the court today.
He said the court had informed both sides that a new date would be given.
“It’s the judge that informed us that the ruling was not ready, and they will revert back to us with a new date,” he said.
Sandhu also confirmed that today marked the second postponement after the matter was initially fixed for Friday (Sept 25).
“Yes, last week was supposed to be on Friday, and then now it’s the second time,” he said.
Asked whether the reason remained the same, he said: “Yes, the judge ruling is not ready.”
The ruling concerns an originating summons filed by Abu Bekir seeking the production and inspection of Cahya Mata’s accounting and other records.
The application is separate from other ongoing legal proceedings involving Abu Bekir and Cahya Mata, including the injunction proceedings and matters concerning his position as a company director.
The records application dates back to March last year, when Abu Bekir sought access to financial and accounting records involving Cahya Mata and several of its subsidiaries. He had said the application was filed after his requests for the records were not addressed.
The matter is being heard before Judicial Commissioner Zaleha Mohd Yusuf Pan, who is also handling other proceedings arising from the wider Cahya Mata-Abu Bekir dispute.
In separate proceedings, Cahya Mata has sought an injunction against Abu Bekir over, among other matters, attending board meetings and providing confidential company information to third parties.
A new date for delivery of the ruling has yet to be fixed and will be stated in a subsequent court cause list. — DayakDaily
