PUTRAJAYA, July 17 Hindraf Makkal Shakti (Hindraf) mislaid a interest today to set in reserve a High Court's refusal to grant it leave to beginner a legal examination duplicate regarding to a preference in not approving as well as registering a organization as a non-governmental organization (NGO).
Court of Appeal's three-member panel chaired by Datuk Seri Abu Samah Nordin ruled which Hindraf's interest was educational in perspective of a Registrar of Societies' (ROS) minute dated Sep 22 final year to reject a duplicate to be purebred as an NGO.
Justice Abu Samah pronounced a court agreed with a preference of a High Court judge as well as which Hindraf had not shown which he had erred in law as well as in actuality in his decision.
The panel, additionally comprising Justices Datuk Alizatul Khair Osman Khairuddin as well as Datuk Lim Yee Lan, unanimously dismissed Hindraf's interest as well as systematic it to compensate RM5,000 in legal costs.
Hindraf was delectable against a preference made by Judge Abang Iskandar Abang Hashim upon June 30 final year, denying it leave to record a legal examination duplicate upon a ground which a ROS had not made any preference regarding to Hindraf's registration.
Hindraf secretary P. Ramesh in his duplicate filed upon May twenty-five final year, named a budding minister, Home Minister Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Hussein, a Registrar of Societies (ROS) of Malaysia as well as a Federal Territory ROS as respondents.
Ramesh sought a certiorari sequence to set in reserve a preference of a respondents presumed to be given upon April twenty-four final year as well as a mandamus sequence to enforce a respondents to approve as well as register Hindraf as an NGO.
Hindraf claimed a respondents had refused to reply to a duplicate to be authorized as wel! l as pur ebred as an NGO.
In his ancillary affidavit, Ramesh pronounced a duplicate to register Hindraf as an NGO was made upon Oct 2, 2009 as well as which a duplicate was made formed upon a rights of leisure as well as equality as provided under Article 10(1)(C) as well as Article 8 of a Federal Constitution.
The panel accepted a acquiescence by Senior Federal Counsel Noor Hisham Ismail representing a respondents which a interest was educational in perspective of a ROS' letter.
He pronounced Hindraf's duplicate for leave to record a legal examination was premature.
Lawyer P. Uthayakumar, who is additionally Hindraf's legal adviser, argued which a ROS' minute was not in a record of interest as a minute came after a High Court delivered a decision.
Uthayakumar pronounced Hindraf would bring a make a difference up to a Federal Court. Bernama
Read More @ Source More Barisan Nasional (BN) | Pakatan Rakyat (PR) | Sociopolitics Plus |
Courtesy of Bonology.com Politically Incorrect Buzz & Buzz
No comments:
Post a Comment