The High Court today rejected an application by a former Sentul police chief to strike out the statement of defence filed by Kapar member of parliament S Manikavasagam and three others, in his RM10 million defamation suit against them.

Judicial commissioner Dr Prasad Sandosham Abraham, who made the decision in  chambers, also dismissed assistant commissioner of police K Kumaran's application to enter judgment against the four, after hearing submissions from both parties.

In his applications, Kumaran said the defence was frivolous, vexatious and an abuse of the court process.

Kumaran, who is currently attached to the parole division of the Home Ministry, filed the suit against Manikavasagam, Makkal Osai Tamil daily editor M Rajintheram, Makkal Osai and its distributor, Osai Distributors Sdn Bhd.

k sujatha The suit was in connection with a news report on the death of local actress K Sujatha ( left ).

The report, based on a media statement from Manikavasagam, claimed that Kumaran had worked in the Perak MIC office prior to joining the police force.

Sujatha, 29, had died suddenly on June 25, 2007, at the Tengku Ampuan Rahimah Hospital in Klang after she was taken there from her house in Jalan Ipoh, Sentul.

The investigation into the case was carried out by Sentul police.

On July 27, 2007, Manikavasagam filed a police report pertaining to allegations contained in a poison-pen letter he had received.

The letter claimed that there were elements of foul play in the actress’ death and implicated MIC president and Works Minister S Samy Vellu’s son, Vel Paari. Sujatha had worked as a private secretary for the minister’s son in the MIC investment arm, Maika Holdings.

Date of trial yet to be fixed

After today's proceedings, Manikavasagam's counsel, N Surendran, told the media that Prasad, in his decision, said the applications "were of no merit, and held that the suit should be decided by way of trial."

The date for the trial has yet been fixed.

In his suit filed on Aug 8, 2007, besides the RM10 million in damages, Kumaran is also seeking damages for "tort of conspiracy", aggravated and exemplary damages.

Kumaran alleged that the published article had caused serious damage to his credibility.

Manikavasagam and the three others, in their defence filed in 2008, said the statement was justified and it would be proved during the trial.

- Bernama