The court decided the following in this case: A society registered under the Societies Act 1966 is a legal entity capable of being sued through its office bearer, distinguishing it from political parties which lack the requisite reputation to sustain defamation claims (!) (!) . The principle established in the Lee Tak Suan case was followed, confirming that a society, upon registration under a statute, gains legal recognition of its existence and is a legal entity (!) (!) . The court determined that the Federal Court's decision regarding political parties in the Lim Lip Eng case is limited specifically to that context and does not apply to societies being sued for defamation (!) (!) . The Defendant's application to have the preliminary issue of law determined was answered positively, validating the society's capacity to be sued in the name of its office bearer (!) (!) . The Plaintiff was ordered to pay a cost of RM8000 to the Defendant, subject to allocation (!) . The matter was allowed to proceed to trial (!) .

RAGAVAN RAJOO vs IGNATIAN BENEDICT DURAISINGHAM

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2025 MarsdenLR 3605

HIGH COURT MALAYA SHAH ALAM
RAGAVAN RAJOO – Appellant
Versus
IGNATIAN BENEDICT DURAISINGHAM – Respondent

Petitioner Advocates:Shangeetha Thana Sehgaran ,Respondent Advocate: Ashok Kandiah,Mishand Pathmanathan

Judgement Key Points

The court decided the following in this case:

A society registered under the Societies Act 1966 is a legal entity capable of being sued through its office bearer, distinguishing it from political parties which lack the requisite reputation to sustain defamation claims (!) (!) .
The principle established in the Lee Tak Suan case was followed, confirming that a society, upon registration under a statute, gains legal recognition of its existence and is a legal entity (!) (!) .
The court determined that the Federal Court's decision regarding political parties in the Lim Lip Eng case is limited specifically to that context and does not apply to societies being sued for defamation (!) (!) .
The Defendant's application to have the preliminary issue of law determined was answered positively, validating the society's capacity to be sued in the name of its office bearer (!) (!) .
The Plaintiff was ordered to pay a cost of RM8000 to the Defendant, subject to allocation (!) .
The matter was allowed to proceed to trial (!) .

Noor Hayati Mat J:

Introduction

[1] Defendant filed this application for a question of law to be determined on preliminary issue by this Court under O 33 r 5 and/or under O 14A of the Rules of Court 2012 (ROC) via encl 41. The initial question posed is:

"Can the Plaintiff commence and sustain an action on a cause of action in defamation against the Defendant, which is a society pursuant to the provisions of the Societies Act 1966 ."

[2] In the midst of hearing both parties, I have proposed revised questions as follows:

1. Whether the Defendant can be sued for defamation in the light of Lim Lip Eng 's case?

2. Whether the Federal Court in Lim Lip Eng , referring to the statement in para 64 that "as a matter of policy, the focus or our judgment must be confined to the question of law posed" means that the judgment is limited only to whether a political party or society can sue for defamation?

3. Whether a society is a legal entity?

[3] On 13 September 2024, having heard both parties and submissions filed, I answered the questions in the affirmative and gave my brief grounds pronounced as follows:

Decision:

I have considered in detail the issue raised by the Defendant and, after careful

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2025 MarsdenLR 3605

HIGH COURT MALAYA SHAH ALAMRAGAVAN RAJOO – AppellantVersusIGNATIAN BENEDICT DURAISINGHAM – Respondent

Cases Referred (3)

HIGH COURT MALAYA SHAH ALAM
RAGAVAN RAJOO – Appellant
Versus
IGNATIAN BENEDICT DURAISINGHAM – Respondent