JUDGMENTBY: KAMALANATHAN RATNAM JC

Background facts

(a) The libel

The plaintiff and defendant are both advocates and solicitors of the High Court of Malaya. They are both related through marriage. The plaintiff had married the defendants sister. There are two children of the marriage both of whom are also advocates and solicitors of the High Court of Malaya; but it is only the daughter, Shanti, who is involved in this suit.

The plaintiff contends that the defendant wrote of him falsely and maliciously a letter, and which was faxed to the plaintiffs legal firm. The relevant contents of the said letter are as follows:

Our client further wishes to inform you that it is your daughter who

goes round making allegations against you and in fact she wanted to

lodge a police report against you and our client stopped it.

Our client states that she is very embarrassed that you are a source of

disgrace to the family and to her and she wonders how you manage to

walk around and our client has even stopped taking cases and going to

court because of you. You were a source of embarrassment in London and

you are now continuing it here and further her tuition money was used

by Vijayalakshmi to clothe and educate you in London.

Our client wants you to take the Mahabharat and read it. Our client

feels that you are a reincarnation of Duryodhana who was so lustful and

greedy that the whole of the Kuru dynasty was destroyed. Similarly your

whole family will be destroyed.

Please go to the temple and start praying. There is no smoke with fire.

The said letter was written by the defendants firm acting for the defendant, and sent to the plaintiff.

The plaintiff interpreted the said letter to mean, inter alia, that he had committed incest with his daughter and that he was unfit to practice his profession as an advocate and solicitor. The plaintiff contended that the defendant had on diverse occasions repeated the said libel or similar libel to her brothers and sisters and other relatives and lawyers.

(b) Seremban High Court Civil Suit 22-61-93 (the Seremban suit)

In this suit filed by Vijayalakshmi Devi d/o Nadchatiram, Dr Mahadevan a/l Nadchatiram and Datin Seri Danapakia Devi d/o Nadchatiram against Jegadevan s/o Nadchatiram, Mahadevi d/o Nadchatiram and Suseela Devi d/o Nadchatiram, the said Mahadevi d/o Nadchatiram (who is the defendant in the suit before me) had filed a written submission in which she is reported to have said as follows:

If ever these proceedings were instituted, it was all done by

Thiruchelvasegaram, the first plaintiffs husband, for he has been

deprived of his daughter with whom he is intensely in love and the

daughter cannot stand or bear his sight. Even recently, he requested as

a precondition to withdraw all cases and sent a message through the

second plaintiff to the second defendant that his daughter be sent back.

The first plaintiffs husband is a slimy creep and an incestuous

bastard for having been caned by the first defendant for his immoral

activities against his daughter, he is now using the court as a medium

to take his revenge against the first defendant. Should the court waste

time unnecessarily? The poor child, how much mental agony she has

undergone? Believe me my Lord this is the truth.

On the application of the plaintiff, the learned judge ordered the said words to be deleted and expunged from the submission. The plaintiff was never a party to the Seremban suit but the first plaintiff in the Seremban suit is the wife of the plaintiff herein.

(c) Allegation of conspiracy

The plaintiff further contended that the defendant in conspiracy with his daughter and other members of the family had defamed and injured him in his standing and profession with the sole motive of forcing the plaintiffs wife to withdraw all actions filed by her for and on behalf of Nadchatiram Realiti