NIC SANG FINANCE COMPANY LTD v. MAN WING FAI AND ANOTHER

DCMP 74/2025

[2025] HKDC 1705

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

MISCELLANEOUS PROCEEDINGS NO 74 of 2025

——————————

BETWEEN

——————————

——————————

————————————————————

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

————————————————————

Introduction

1.  At the hearing on 19 September 2025, I granted an order in terms of the reliefs sought by the plaintiff. Here are my reasons.

Service

2.  The originating summons was served on the 1^st and 2^nd defendants by insertion into the letter box of their usual and last known address on 17 January 2025.

3.  The notice of appointment to hear originating summons was served on the 1^st and 2^nd defendants by insertion into the letter box of their usual and last known address on 23 April 2025.

4.  With the service of the 2^nd Affidavit of Au-Yeung Pui Wai Raymond filed on 9 September 2025, the 1^st and 2^nd defendants were informed of the adjourned hearing day on 19 September 2025.

5.  I am satisfied that the 1^st and 2^nd defendants have due notice of these proceedings and today’s hearing and they have chosen not to take any action.

The plaintiff’s case

6.  The plaintiff is a licensed money lender.

7.  The 1^st and 2^nd defendants are the registered owners as joint tenants of All Those San Tin Lot No 173 in DD 102 and the building and construction erected thereon (“the property”).

8.  By a loan agreement dated 29 February 2024 (“the loan agreement”), the plaintiff lent a sum of HK$600,000 to the 1^st defendant at the interest rate of 22% per annum.

9.  The 1^st defendant made default since 29 June 2024. The outstanding principal at the commencement of these proceedings is HK$595,716.

10.  By a mortgage dated 29 February 2024 (“the Mortgage”), the 1^st defendant as borrower of one part and the plaintiff as the lender of the other part, the 1^st defendant charged his interest in the property to the plaintiff as security for due repayment of all monies and liabilities incurred under the loan agreement.

Money judgment

11.  The plaintiff’s case is not controverted and I accept it at its face value.

12.  I am satisfied that the plaintiff has in form and in substance complied with the requirements of a moneylender’s action under Order 83A. The plaintiff is entitled to recover the outstanding principal of $595,716 and interest.

Order for possession

13.  Clause 7.1 of the Mortgage provides, inter alia, that if the mortgagor makes default in payment of the secured indebtedness or any part thereof following demand being made, an event of default shall be deemed to have occurred.

14.  Clause 8.1 of the Mortgage provides, inter alia, that if any event of default has occurred, it shall be lawful for the mortgagee to enter into and take possession of the property and to sell the property by public auction, tender or private contract.

15.  I am satisfied that the requirements of Order 88 have been complied.

16.  By reason of the default of the 1^st defendant, the plaintiff is entitled to an order for possession of the property.

Order of sale

17.  As the 1^st defendant had made default in payment, the plaintiff as mortgagee became a person holding an interest in the property under s 3 of the Partition Ordinance and may institute the present proceedings: see Maxcolm Finance Ltd v Cheng Chi Man and another [2019] HKCFI 2928 and Moneysq Ltd v Liu Kit Ling and another [2019] HKDC 860.

18.  The property is a 3-storey building with an area of 285 square feet each. There is only one entrance on ground floor. The 1^st and 2^nd floors can only be reached by the internal staircases. Due to the small area of each floor, it is not viable to construct another entrance and staircase in order to divide the property into two halves.

19.  Moreover, neither the 1^st nor the 2^nd defendants has tendered any reason by affidavit as to why an order for sale under the Partition Ordinance should not be granted; why it is not impracticable to physically partition the property into two halves; why a sale of the property would not be beneficial to all the parties or that significant hardship would be caused to the 2^nd defendant.

20.  In any event, the 2^nd defendant shall be entitled to half of the proceeds of sale.

21.  Accordingly, I am satisfied that an order of sale ought to be made and I so order.

Reserved price

22.  The plaintiff has produced a valuation report which opined that the market value of the property as at 12 May 2025 is in the order of HK$3,000,000.

23.  I accept the said valuation and direct that the property shall be sold with a reserved price of HK$3,000,000.

Costs

24.  By summary assessment, I order the 1^st defendant to pay the plaintiff the costs of this action in the sum of HK$80,070.