THE Shah Alam High Court has rejected an interlocutory injunction application by Seafield Sri Maha Mariamman temple devotees to restrain One City Development from taking over the land on which the house of worship sits and demolishing the structure.

Justice Wong Kian Kheong said the plaintiffs, comprising 50 devotees, failed to “discharge the onus to satisfy this court that there exist special circumstances” to stay the suit, adding that One City is the registered owner of the land.

He said the plaintiffs have no locus standi as they are merely devotees, and that the temple is represented by a management body headed by K. Chellappa, one of the seven respondents named in the injunction application.

Wong said the attorney-general has “no power” over land matters, with authority over land acquisition vested in the state, in this case, Selangor.

On the rights of Hindu customs, he said: “There is no proof that Hindu customs have the force of law in this case. In any event, any custom of land usage cannot override the express and codified provisions of the National Land Code regarding the rights of a registered proprietor of land, which are guaranteed under Article 13(1) of the constitution.”

The injunction application was filed by M. Ramachandran and 49 others against the seven defendants, among them One City, the Selangor government and Chellappa, who is former temple committee president.

Wong set March 5 to determine the costs to be awarded to the defendants.

The plaintiffs’ lawyer, T. Rajasekaran, said he will consult the devotees on whether to appeal.

One City’s lawyer, Claudia Cheah Pek Yee, told reporters that the developer is “at liberty to continue”.

“Whether the developer will do so is another issue. There are many other proceedings challenging the validity of the consent judgment in public courts.”

Sime UEP Properties Bhd lawyer Megat Abdul Munir told reporters: “Being a previous owner (of the land), we have been unnecessarily dragged into the proceedings. I think justice has been served for us in that we’re not dragged any longer in this dispute, of which we should not have been involved in, in the first place.”

Today’s case stems from a dispute over a consent judgment that was part of a court solution in 2014 involving One City, the Selangor government and two claimants to the temple management, namely Chellappa and M. Nagaraju.

Chellappa and Nagaraju, who were involved in a separate legal battle over control of the temple management, agreed to hand back the land on which the temple sits to One City after the developer consented to donate RM1.5 million for the construction of a new temple on one of two plots of land given by the company.

However, Nagaraju refused to abide by the consent judgment to relocate.

After the temple gave up its rights to one of the two plots, One City gave it another RM1 million in compensation.

The tussle led to armed men storming the house of worship in the early hours of November 26 last year, mere days before the expiry of the developer’s eviction notice.

The next day, a group ransacked the One City office in what appeared to be retaliation.

Police arrested more than 100 suspects in their probe into the riots, which led to the death of firefighter Muhammad Adib Mohd Kassim.

A 52-day inquest into his death is ongoing.

The decision today once again rules in favour of the developer to take custody of the land in question.

Attorney-General Tommy Thomas had said in the meantime, the 0.4ha plot would be handed over to a court-administered trust, resulting in the temple not needing to relocate.

He had said the Attorney-General’s Chambers would intervene in the consent judgment to allow the trust to be set up.

One City, at the time, said it supported the comprehensive settlement for the land, which was proposed by Thomas and subject to terms to be agreed upon by the parties involved.

There has yet to be progress on the attorney-general’s proposal. – February 13, 2019.