<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR>March 28, 2009
TONG GARDEN CASE
</TR><!-- headline one : start --><TR>Brother to pay sister $2m over share dispute
</TR><!-- headline one : end --><TR>Sister's testimony corroborated by those from previous cases </TR><!-- Author --><TR><TD class="padlrt8 georgia11 darkgrey bold" colSpan=2>By Khushwant Singh
</TD></TR><!-- show image if available --><TR vAlign=bottom><TD width=330>
</TD><TD width=10>
</TD><TD vAlign=bottom>
Ms Ong, 43, says she regrets taking her brother to court, but is relieved at the final judgment. Mr Ong was unable to explain missing details and contradictions in his affidavit and testimony from a previous court case. -- ST PHOTO: CHEW SENG KIM
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
<TABLE><TBODY><TR><TD>
View more photos
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
<!-- START OF : div id="storytext"--><!-- more than 4 paragraphs -->THE youngest sister of Mr Ong Boon Chuan regrets taking him to court but is relieved that he now has to pay her $2 million.
The High Court yesterday ordered Mr Ong, 54, to pay his sister, Ms Ong Siew Lay, 43, the sum of money for taking over her shares in Tong Guan Food Products in 1999.
Delivering the decision in chambers yesterday, Justice Woo Bih Li noted that her testimony was corroborated by statements in affidavits and testimony tendered by Mr Ong in previous court cases between the siblings.
Their father, Mr Ong Tong Guan, founded the company that owns the Tong Garden brand of nuts and snacks. Even before he died in 1984, his children had started bickering.
Since their mother died in 1999, there have been at least four court battles over various issues of the family's business.
Outside the courtroom yesterday, Ms Ong told reporters that she found little joy in her victory.
She said: 'It doesn't feel good.
'My heart is very heavy. They were my shares, yet I had to come to court and fight my brother for payment.
'I don't like to wash dirty linen in public, and it hurts me.'
She had testified that her father gave her 50,000 shares in the holding company, which was held by her mother.
In 1999, she agreed to sell the shares to her brother.
She said she then loaned the money back to him - at her mother's suggestion - as he needed it for his property development business.
But when she asked for the money back in June 2007, he denied it was hers.
When it was his turn to testify, Mr Ong claimed the shares were his mother's, and she had given them to him.
He claimed that when their mother wanted shares in the business, it was agreed among the brothers that the youngest daughter's share would go to her.
This meant Ms Ong never owned any shares, he said.
However, he was unable to tell his sister's lawyer, Mr James Ponniah, why he had not stated this in his affidavit.
He was also unable to explain why court documents from a case in 2000 stated that he testified that his father had given a 20 per cent share of the company each to three sons and a 10 per cent share each to four daughters.
There were altogether 10 siblings, but he and another brother were left out as they had already been given shares in other companies.
The eldest daughter did not get anything as she had married a business competitor.
Mr Ong, a property developer, was not in court yesterday. Contacted through phone, he said he would consult his lawyers before deciding whether to appeal.
Ms Ong, who devotes her time to doing charity work for a temple, hopes she never has to set foot in a court again. [email protected]
TONG GARDEN CASE
</TR><!-- headline one : start --><TR>Brother to pay sister $2m over share dispute
</TR><!-- headline one : end --><TR>Sister's testimony corroborated by those from previous cases </TR><!-- Author --><TR><TD class="padlrt8 georgia11 darkgrey bold" colSpan=2>By Khushwant Singh
</TD></TR><!-- show image if available --><TR vAlign=bottom><TD width=330>
</TD><TD width=10>
Ms Ong, 43, says she regrets taking her brother to court, but is relieved at the final judgment. Mr Ong was unable to explain missing details and contradictions in his affidavit and testimony from a previous court case. -- ST PHOTO: CHEW SENG KIM
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
<TABLE><TBODY><TR><TD>
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
<!-- START OF : div id="storytext"--><!-- more than 4 paragraphs -->THE youngest sister of Mr Ong Boon Chuan regrets taking him to court but is relieved that he now has to pay her $2 million.
The High Court yesterday ordered Mr Ong, 54, to pay his sister, Ms Ong Siew Lay, 43, the sum of money for taking over her shares in Tong Guan Food Products in 1999.
Delivering the decision in chambers yesterday, Justice Woo Bih Li noted that her testimony was corroborated by statements in affidavits and testimony tendered by Mr Ong in previous court cases between the siblings.
Their father, Mr Ong Tong Guan, founded the company that owns the Tong Garden brand of nuts and snacks. Even before he died in 1984, his children had started bickering.
Since their mother died in 1999, there have been at least four court battles over various issues of the family's business.
Outside the courtroom yesterday, Ms Ong told reporters that she found little joy in her victory.
She said: 'It doesn't feel good.
'My heart is very heavy. They were my shares, yet I had to come to court and fight my brother for payment.
'I don't like to wash dirty linen in public, and it hurts me.'
She had testified that her father gave her 50,000 shares in the holding company, which was held by her mother.
In 1999, she agreed to sell the shares to her brother.
She said she then loaned the money back to him - at her mother's suggestion - as he needed it for his property development business.
But when she asked for the money back in June 2007, he denied it was hers.
When it was his turn to testify, Mr Ong claimed the shares were his mother's, and she had given them to him.
He claimed that when their mother wanted shares in the business, it was agreed among the brothers that the youngest daughter's share would go to her.
This meant Ms Ong never owned any shares, he said.
However, he was unable to tell his sister's lawyer, Mr James Ponniah, why he had not stated this in his affidavit.
He was also unable to explain why court documents from a case in 2000 stated that he testified that his father had given a 20 per cent share of the company each to three sons and a 10 per cent share each to four daughters.
There were altogether 10 siblings, but he and another brother were left out as they had already been given shares in other companies.
The eldest daughter did not get anything as she had married a business competitor.
Mr Ong, a property developer, was not in court yesterday. Contacted through phone, he said he would consult his lawyers before deciding whether to appeal.
Ms Ong, who devotes her time to doing charity work for a temple, hopes she never has to set foot in a court again. [email protected]
