SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 MarsdenLR 308

HIGH COURT MALAYA SHAH ALAM
POOVANESWARAN MOGAN & ORS – Appellant
Versus
SURESH MURUGARPILLAI – Respondent
[Writ Summon No: BA-22NCVC-457-11-2020]



Petitioner Advocates:Dinesh Muthal,Low Tze Ken ,Respondent Advocate: Darshan Singh

Plaintiffs lacked locus standi to sue for temple management issues as they were not members of the registered societies, violating the Societies Act 1966.

Headnote:(A) Societies Act 1966 – Section 9(c) and 9(h) – Civil suit regarding management and funds of a temple – Plaintiffs lacked locus standi as they were not members of the registered societies managing the temple – Court found that the plaintiffs' claims were unsustainable due to failure to comply with statutory requirements. (Paras 2, 18, 24, 30)

(B) Locus Standi – The plaintiffs, as founders of the temple, could not sue in their personal capacity for alleged mismanagement – The correct parties must be the registered societies or their office bearers. (Paras 23, 25)

Facts of the case: The plaintiffs claimed mismanagement of temple funds by the defendant, who registered societies without their knowledge. They sought declaratory orders regarding the temple's management and funds. (Paras 1, 15)

Findings of Court: The plaintiffs' action was dismissed due to lack of locus standi and failure to comply with the Societies Act. The defendant's counterclaim was also dismissed. (Paras 36, 37)

Issues: Whether the plaintiffs and defendant had the correct standing to bring the suit and whether they were entitled to the reliefs sought. (Paras 17, 28)

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that only members or office bearers of the societies could bring claims related to the societies, and the plaintiffs did not meet this requirement. (Paras 22, 34)

Result: Claims and counterclaims dismissed.

JUDGMENT

Faizah Jamaludin J:

Introduction

[1] This is a civil suit by the plaintiffs against the defendant in respect of the operation and management of the Sri Kottai Sanggili Karuppar Ayya Temple Ulu Langat located on Jalan Rasa Sayang, Cheras, Selangor (the "temple") and the collection of funds from the public for the rebuilding and expansion of the temple.

[2] After full trial, I dismissed the plaintiffs' action against the defendant, and the defendant's counterclaim against the plaintiffs, for lack of locus standi and for failure to comply with the mandatory requirements in s 9(c) of the Societies Act 1966 ("the Societies Act").

[3] The full reasons for my decision are set out in this judgment.

Key Background Facts

[4] The temple has its beginnings as a prayer hut built in 2007 by the first and 2nd plaintiffs in front of a factory building rented by the 1st plaintiff. They had built a small hut with a Hindu prayer symbol - a trisula, which the plaintiff later replaced with the statute of a deity, and the prayer hut converted into the temple.

[5] The temple was managed by plaintiffs and others, who are members of an informal committee set up in 2014. The members of the informal committee are termed "ahli jawatankuasa asal' in the statement of claim. They were not members of a registered society. Nevertheless, to ensure uniformity of reference between the pleadings and this judgment, the members of the informal committee set up in 2014 are termed as the "original committee members" in this judgment.

[6] In 2015, the defendant voluntarily offered his services to rebuild and enlarge the temple. The plaintiffs allowed the defendant to undertake construction works to rebuild and enlarge the temple.

[7] Unbeknownst to the plaintiffs and the original committee members of the temple, on 14 June 2017, the defendant and his father registered two societies with the Registrar of Companies i.e., (i) Persatuan Penganut Sri Kottai Sangili Karrupar Ayya Ulu Langat (PPM-030-10-14062017) ("Persatuan Penganut") and (ii) Persatuan Kebajikan Sri Sangili Karrupar Ayya Ulu Langat (PPM- 003-10-2111017) ("Persatuan Kebajikan"), for the management of the temple and the collection of funds for the temple. The plaintiffs contend that they only found out about the registration of the societies in 2018.

[8] On 2 February 2018, the original committee members entered into an agreement with the Persatuan Penganut and Persatuan Kebajikan for both societies to do the following:

(i) provide the accounts of the kumbhaabishegam (consecration) festival of the temple;

(ii) call for an election of new office bearers and new committee members of the societies; and

(iii) make public the accounts of the societies.

[9] Both the Persatuan Penganut and Persatuan Kebajikan failed to honour the said agreement. The dispute between the original committee members and the societies was brought to the Malaysia Hindu Sangam, which is the national committee of Hindu affairs in Malaysia.

[10] The Malaysia Hindu Sangam, in a letter dated 2 April 2018 to the Persatuan Penganut and Persatuan Kebajikan, requested that both societies, honour the agreement of 2 February 2018. In its letter the Malaysia Hindu Sangam reminded both societies that "a Hindu temple is public place of worship and every Hindu in the locality has a right to be a member of the Hindu Temple. Therefore, please comply with the terms of the Agreement."

[11] Nonetheless, both the Persatuan Penganut and Persatuan Kebajikan failed to comply with the agreement: they did not provide the accounts for kumbhaabishegam festival, make public the accounts of both societies or call for an election of new office bearers and new committee members.

[12] The plaintiffs then sought the help and support of YB Ganabathirau, a member of Selangor State Exco, and YB Erdy Faizal bin Eddy Yusof, who is the ADUN for N23 Dusun Tua. YB Erdy Faizal requested that the Malaysia Hindu Sangam coordinate the election of the new committee members for the temple.

[1

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top