The High Court in Shah Alam today dismissed a bid by 50 devotees of the Seafield Sri Maha Mariamman temple to prevent developer One City Development Sdn Bhd from taking possession of the land on which the temple sits.
In his judgment, Justice Wong Kian Kheong said the 50 temple devotees who acted as plaintiffs in the case had no locus standi to sue the five defendants, including One City Development Sdn Bhd.
He dismissed the plaintiffs' application for an interlocutory injunction to restrain One City from entering the land to demolish the temple, and for an order to stay the execution of their writ of possession.
In his judgment, Wong stressed that the developer has the right to the land as it is the registered owner – a right protected by the Federal Constitution and under the National Land Code.
He added that there was no proof that Hindu custom had the force of law as per the plaintiffs' submission.
"I am constrained to reject any reliance on Hindu customs at the expense of the National Land Code.
"According to the definition (of law in Article 160(2) of the Federal Constitution), custom or usage can only be enforced if it can be shown that the custom or usage has the 'force of law'. There is no proof that Hindu custom has the force of law in this case," he told the court this afternoon.
Wong added that in any event, custom or usage could not override provisions under the code involving the rights of the land's registered owner.
The suit was brought about by 10 temple devotees, representing 40 others, against One City, temple committee member KK Chellapan, former landowner Sime UEP Properties Bhd, the Selangor Urban and Rural Planning director, and the Selangor government.
They are also seeking a declaration that all seven defendants initially named in the suit, or any two or more, were involved with other persons in the "alleged conspiracy."
Two defendants were later excluded from the suit, including a former temple official who is now deceased.
The case was initially heard by High Court judge Gunalan Muniandy, but was transferred to Wong's court after the former recused himself in November last year.
Gunalan had dismissed another case concerning the temple brought by another group of devotees.
AG has no power over the land
Wong said the plaintiffs also had no locus standi to file the suit as they did not comply with Section 9(c) of the Societies Act 1966, which stipulates that any legal action by a society should be instituted in the name of the public officer declared to the Registrar of Societies.
"I am of the view that Section 9(c) of the Societies Act is a mandatory provision, because the legislature has employed the use of the mandatory term 'shall' in the opening sentence of Section 9 of the act.
"If Section 9(c) of the act is not mandatory, this will open the floodgates of litigation to any member of any registered society to sue on behalf of the registered society on any matter regarding the society."
In delivering his decision, Wong also did not allow the devotees' application to stay all proceedings in the suit pending intervention by attorney-general Tommy Thomas.
He said that the intervention does not constitute a special circumstance to stay the suit, adding that the attorney-general "has no power over the land or any alienated land (as stipulated under Section 5 of the code)."
The judge also ruled that the suit was barred by "both limbs of the res judicata doctrine," as the matter had already been adjudicated by a competent court.
Writ of possession can proceed
Meanwhile, lawyer Claudia Cheah Pek Yee, representing One City, said the judgment today means that the developer is allowed to continue with the execution of its writ of possession.
"We are at liberty to continue with the execution. At liberty... Whether (my client) is going to (go ahead) or not is another issue," she said when met outside the court.
A Vasanthi, one of the lawyers representing the plaintiffs, said she would refer to her clients on their next course of action.
During the proceeding, Wong also ordered for the plaintiffs to pay damages to One City, and for the court registrar to assess damages regarding all loss suffered by the developer that arose from the undertaking.
He fixed March 5 for submissions by the plaintiffs' lawyers.
The Seafield temple was at the centre of a riot which stemmed from the developer's attempt to take control of the land on Nov 25.
The incident happened when the developer allegedly hired thugs to secure the temple, leading to clashes with temple devotees that, in turn, led to riots.
One City has since denied that it had hired thugs as stated by Home Minister Muhyiddin Yassin.
The riots saw Fire and Rescue Department personnel Muhammad Adib Mohd Kassim injured when he was allegedly attacked by rioters. He succumbed to his injuries while receiving treatment at the National Heart Institute on Dec 17.
An inquest to determine the firefighter's cause of death is ongoing at a Coroner's Court in Shah Alam. - Mkini
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.