No documents to prove Sapura a family business, founder tells court

Free Malaysia Today

21-05-2025

Shahriman Shamsuddin wants the Kuala Lumpur High Court to wind up Sapura Holdings Sdn Bhd, citing an irreparable breakdown of mutual trust and confidence between elder brother Shahril and himself.
KUALA LUMPUR : The founder of the Sapura group admitted in the High Court today that there was no documentary evidence to prove Sapura Holdings Sdn Bhd (SHSB) was a family company.
Shamsuddin Abdul Kadir, 90, was testifying in a petition brought by his son Shahriman, 56, seeking to wind up SHSB.
SHSB is the parent company to more than 40 subsidiaries valued at RM832 million. The group includes listed entity Sapura Resources Bhd.
Shahril, 63, and Shahriman each own a 48% stake in SHSB, with the remaining 4% held by Rameli Musa, 79.
In an affidavit affirmed on Feb 3, Shamsuddin took issue with Shahril and Rameli's denial that SHSB was always intended to be a family company and that the relationship between shareholders was premised on mutual trust and confidence.
'I am quite taken aback by their denial as it was not a subtle understanding and it was repeated throughout the years and informed in many meetings and decisions,' the affidavit read.
Cross-examined by counsel Ranjit Singh, representing Rameli, Shamsuddin conceded he had no documents to back up that claim.
Ranjit: Although you said that you had repeated it throughout the years in many meetings and decisions, (do you agree) there's no document that you can produce to prove what you said?
Shamsuddin: No document. It was an understanding.
Ranjit: In various parts of your affidavit, you said SHSB remains a family company. I put it to you that originally, when you and your wife were the shareholders, it was a family company, but with Rameli's introduction (as a shareholder), that concept of family company ceased.
Shamsuddin: I disagree.
Asked by Ranjit about Rameli's role if a dispute arose between the brothers, Shamsuddin said it was not his intention that Rameli would align himself with either one of them to form a decision-making majority.
Ranjit: Your sons may have differing views on different issues. So assuming one of your sons said 'yes', and the other said 'no', would you accept that Rameli could use his judgement and break the deadlock?
Shamsuddin: Correct.
Ranjit: I put it to you that when you said it was not your intention that Rameli would align himself to any of the brothers to form a majority, that is a false statement because he has to make his own judgement.
Shamsuddin: My intention was for them to work together.
The cross-examination of Shamsuddin will continue before Justice Leong Wai Hong on May 15.
The hearing was scheduled to begin yesterday, but was postponed to today to facilitate settlement negotiations. FMT understands that those talks are ongoing.
In the petition filed in September last year, Shahriman said the winding-up was necessary due to an irreparable breakdown of mutual trust and confidence between Shahril and himself.
SHSB, Shahril, and Rameli, all named as respondents, oppose the petition. They claim SHSB was never intended to be a family company and that it would not be just and equitable for the company to be wound up.
Lawyers Rabindra S Nathan appeared for Shahril, while Idza Hajar Ahmad Idzam represented SHSB.