The Shah Alam High Court today cancelled with cost the interim injunction obtained by MIC president S Samy Vellu to stop his former Youth chief SA Vigneswaran and three others from continuing to publish an article allegedly defamatory of him.

According to Bernama , Judge Rosnaini Saub said Samy Vellu had failed to satisfy the court why he needed the order.

samy vellu 010307 She said there was no evidence that showed the four defendants had intended or planned to reproduce the article which was published on July 9 until Samy Vellu obtained the interim injunction ex-parte on July 29.

"Therefore under this situation, I don't see why the court needs to grant the injunction sought by the plaintiff here," said the judge who read her written judgement in chambers.

Samy Vellu filed the writ of summons on July 24 and named Vigneswaran, Malaysia Nanban editor M Malayandy as well as the Tamil newspaper's publisher Penerbitan Sahabat (M) Sdn Bhd and printer Aslita Sdn Bhd as defendants.

He sought RM10 million in damages for libel, damages for conspiracy, aggravated damages, costs and other reliefs deemed fit by the court.

The former works minister claimed that the article published on the front page of Malaysia Nanban and continued on page four contained elements defamatory of him, tarnished his credibility, reputation and image and changed public perception on his ability to safeguard the interests of the Indian community.

The article in question carried the heading - 'Where is the RM20 million allocated to tackle the social problems faced by youths? - Vickneswaran asks Samy Vellu'.

Issue over translation

sa vigneswaran In his reply filed on Aug 13, Vigneswaran said all the statements he made were true and it was to fulfil his obligation to Indian youths.

Samy Vellu was represented by lawyer S Selvam while Vigneswaran was represented by A Vasanthi and A Kumar. Counsel CS Arumugam and Khairun Niza Husnin acted for the other

three defendants.

The court initially granted the interim injunction ex-parte on July 29. After the inter-partes hearing, however, it today denied Samy Vellu's application for the order with cost.

Rosnaini also said the article was published in Tamil, and the translation into Bahasa Malaysia had been disputed because the plaintiff as well as the first, second and third defendants came out with their own.

She said the court found it difficult to determine whose translation was accurate and should be accepted.

"Whatever it is, I reckon it's better for the issue to be decided in full trial," she said.

No date has been fixed for the full hearing during which the court will also deal with the defences put forward by the defendants.