Sapura Holdings Sdn Bhd (SHSB) director Shahriman Shamsuddin today denied that he opposed the company’s direction, particularly the Sapura Permata project, to maximise personal gains ahead of his exit.
Testifying under cross-examination, Shahriman rejected assertions by lawyer S Rabindra, representing elder brother Shahril, that his position was dictated by his personal interest.
Shahril and minority shareholder Rameli Musa have been named as co-respondents to a winding up petition brought by Shahriman against SHSB.
When questioned about his letter dated March 29, 2023, Shahriman acknowledged that by then, his intention to exit the Sapura Group had already been made known.
Rabindra: I put it to you that in relation to the positions that you were taking in Sapura Group and Sapura Resources Bhd (SRB), your decisions were motivated by the need to ensure that you got the best possible exit value when you exited the Sapura Group?
Shahriman: Disagree.
Rabindra: I put it to you because you needed to get the best possible value when you exited the Sapura Group, you wanted to ensure that Sapura Holdings’ resources were conserved in every possible way. Do you agree or disagree?
Shahriman: Disagree.
Rabindra: I put it to you that for the same reason, the decisions you took at SRB board meetings were to ensure that no more money was spent on project paybacks, so that you could get the best possible exit value when you separated from the Sapura Group.
Shahriman: Disagree.
Rabindra: I put it to you that in all your decisions at the board meetings of SRB in 2023, you were focused only on the short term and not the long term.
Shahriman: Disagree.
Rabindra went on to suggest that each of Shahriman’s objections at the board level was made in his personal interest, and became the basis of his petition.
The lawyer also pointed to Shahril’s reply dated April 2, 2023, in which he cautioned Shahriman “not to proceed with things from (his) personal perspective”.
Rabindra: I put it to you that every decision you took and every stand you made at SRB board meetings was in your personal interest and not in the best interests of SRB.
Shahriman: Disagree.
Rabindra: I put it to you that in the petition that you filed, you dressed up all these events as giving rise to a breakdown of trust and confidence when in fact you were the one manoeuvring the whole time to create the fears of such a breakdown.
Shahriman: Disagree.
Rabindra: I put it to you that there was no breakdown of trust and confidence. Instead, there were merely disagreements of a commercial nature.
Shahriman: Disagree.
The exchange gave rise to several tense moments when Shahriman attempted to offer an explanation in his responses.
However, he was told to do so when re-examined by his own counsel, Gopal Sreeenivasan.
Shahriman is seeking to wind up SHSB, the parent entity of over 40 subsidiaries valued at RM832 million, including the publicly listed SRB.
Both Shahril and Shahriman hold a 48% stake in SHSB, with the remaining 4% owned by Rameli.
In the petition filed last September, Shahriman claimed that an irreparable breakdown in mutual trust and confidence between him and Shahril necessitated SHSB’s dissolution.
He further claimed that the strained relationship between them was exacerbated by events revolving around Project Apex, referring to the development of the 52-storey Sapura Permata tower in the city centre.
The respondents oppose the petition, contending that SHSB was never intended as a family business and that dissolution would be neither just nor equitable.
The proceedings before Justice Leong Wai Hong will continue tomorrow.
