1. ) ELIZABETH A/P PARIYANAN 2. ) JOHNSON RAMASAMY A/L MARAN 3. ) NANTHINE A/P THIRUVENGIDAM 4. ) GUNASEKARAN A/L MARAN v 1. ) MORGUN A/L V.NADESAN 2. ) USHAH DEVI A/P RAJAMANIKAM 3. ) MANISHADEVIE A/P MANIKUMAR 4. ) SANUSHA A/P MURUGAYA 5. ) MAYA VESVANATHAN 6. ) UTHAYARAAJ A/L BALAKRISHNAN

Case Significance

Instructive on the court's power to intervene in a registered society's internal governance where its constitution is breached or natural justice denied, notwithstanding the Registrar of Societies' supervisory role under section 16 of the Societies Act 1966.

This High Court decision at Shah Alam concerns a challenge to the removal of a society's committee members and the appointment of new ones, and the court's jurisdiction to intervene in the internal affairs of a registered society. The plaintiffs, members and former office bearers of a registered children's-welfare association, brought an originating summons for declaratory and injunctive relief concerning the validity of their removal and the appointment of new committee members, the controversy arising from the unilateral action of the first defendant, the chairman, in removing the plaintiffs from their positions and replacing them with the second to sixth defendants. The plaintiffs contended that the second to sixth defendants had never been validly admitted as members in accordance with the association's constitution, so that they could not lawfully be nominated or elected to office, and that no valid annual general meeting had been convened in compliance with the constitution. The court, per Dato' Anita binti Harun JC, first rejected the preliminary objection to its jurisdiction, holding that although section 16 of the Societies Act 1966 vests the Registrar of Societies with supervisory powers, the courts have consistently held that judicial intervention is warranted where there is a breach of a society's constitution or a denial of natural justice. On the merits, it was satisfied that the plaintiffs had established serious irregularities in the removal and appointment exercise, and that the first defendant's unilateral acts in changing the committee and altering the Registrar of Societies' records were unconstitutional and without lawful mandate, defects that could not be cured retrospectively by subsequent resolutions or adjustments. It declared the removal of the plaintiffs and the appointment of the second to sixth defendants unconstitutional, null and void, and their meetings, decisions and actions invalid; reinstated the first plaintiff and the first defendant as secretary and president for the sole purpose of convening a valid annual general meeting within two months in strict accordance with the constitution; directed the Registrar of Societies to rectify its records accordingly pending that meeting; and awarded costs of RM3,000. The judgment is instructive on the court's power to intervene in a society's internal governance where its constitution is breached, notwithstanding the Registrar's supervisory role.