Former Indian Progressive Front (IPF) vice-president V Mathiyalagan today failed to oust Jayashree Gnanapandithan from continuing to serve as the party’s president after the High Court held that it had no jurisdiction to entertain his application for an interim injunction.

In a 26-page judgment, Judicial Commissioner Mohamad Ariff Md Yusof said Section 18C of the Societies Act 1966 stated clearly that the court could not entertain or determine any suit, application or proceeding on any ground in relation to a political party decision.

According to Bernama, Mohamad Ariff said the section indicates if there is a decision by a political party, or a person authorised by the party or its constitution or rules, on any matter relating to the party’s affairs, the courts cannot interfere.

Citing several cases decided by appellate courts, he said: ‘The normal principles of administrative law anchored on animistic error have been displaced by a clear statutory provision which denies jurisdiction to the courts of law to decide on the validity of any decision made by a political party on matters to the party’s affairs.”

He therefore dismissed Mathiyalagan’s application for an interim injunction against Jayashree.

On the main suit, he left it to the defendants -Jayashree, IPF secretary-general K Velayutham and party assistant secretary K Neducheralanathan to take all appropriate steps under the rules for a final disposal of the suit since they had indicated they wanted the suit struck out.

pandithan Lawyer S Selvam who acted for the defendants told reporters later that the court had yet to fix the date to hear the striking out application.

Jayashree was nominated to helm the IPF by its founding president and her husband MG Pandithan ( pix ) on the latter’s death bed last April.

Even then the party was already in a spot with anti-Pandithan grassroots leaders ganging up against the president in a bid to force him to relinquish his post.

The split within the party grew bigger after Pandithan's death and with Jayashree's appointment as the new president.

Plaintiff plans to appeal

Mathiyalagan’s counsel, K Saraswathy meanwhile said she would file an appeal against today’s High Court decision.

Besides the injunction to stop Jayashree from being the IPF president, Mathiyalagan also sought damages, costs and other reliefs deemed fit by the court.

He also sought a court order to stop Jayashree from intervening in the affairs of the party and a declaration that she was not a legitimate IPF president and all actions by her as the president were null and void.

He also wanted a declaration that the letter appointing Jayashree as IPF president dated April 20, 2008 and the meeting of the party's supreme council at the Kuala Lumpur Hospital - where Pandithan was admitted - on April 20, 2008 was null and void.

In addition, Mathiyalagan also alleged that the IPF supreme council's statement on Jayashree's appointment as acting president and later as party president in place of her late husband was a fraud.

He said Jayashree's action in calling herself IPF president without any legitimate policies or powers had brought confusion to IPF supreme council members, IPF members and the public.

Jayashree denied all the allegations in her reply filed on Dec 11. She said there was no fraud, conspiracy or falsification in her appointment as IPF president.