No Prima Facie Case For Grant Of Injunction Has Been Made Out: Madras HC Refuses To Interfere With Expulsion Of O Panneerselvam & 3 Others From AIADMK

A Madras High Court Bench of Justice R Mahadevan and Justice Mohamed Shaffiq has refused to interfere with the order of the Single Judge, whereby the Court had refused to interfere with the July 2022 resolutions passed by the AIADMK general council. The Court held that appellants were not entitled to an injunction with regards to the Special Resolution that was passed to expel them from the membership of the party.

The Court held, "In our opinion, no prima facie case for grant of injunction has been made out by the appellants in respect of the Special Resolution expelling them from the primary membership of the Party and hence, the question of balance of convenience tested on the anvil of irreparable injury need not be gone into. We therefore hold that no case has been made out for grant of interim injunction against the Special Resolution expelling the appellants from the membership of the Party, pending disposal of the suits."

The Bench also observed, "...the election to the post of General Secretary has already taken place and technically, this relief has become infructuous. More importantly, when the appellants have been expelled and there is no interim injunction against such action, pending the suits, the election to the post of General Secretary, cannot be injuncted at their instance. On the basis of the above reasoning and findings rendered on each of the issues, we conclude that the appellants are not entitled for interim injunction / relief as prayed for. Therefore, we do not intend to interfere with the order of the learned Judge in rejecting the original applications filed by the appellants herein."

Through the general resolution, the party had elected Edappadi K Palaniswami as interim chief, besides expelling O Paneerselvam and his aides.

Senior Counsel PS Raman, among others, appeared for the appellants, while Senior Counsel CS Vaidyanathan, among others, appeared for the respondents.

In this case, the Court was hearing the appeals filed by Panneerselvam and his aides R Vaithilingam, Paul Manoj Pandian and J C D Prabhakar challenging the March 28 order of the Single Judge, which ordered maintenance of status-quo ante as of June 23 regarding the party affairs.

Previously, Panneerselvam was the Coordinator and Palaniswami the Joint Coordinator and that directive was for maintenance of the then existing dual power structure. The subsequent order solidified Palaniswami's authority as the sole leader of AIADMK at the time. Soon after, the Supreme Court rejected Panneerselvam's appeal against the Madras High Court's decision instructing him to hand over the party headquarters to Palaniswami.

The Single Judge deemed the AIADMK's resolutions valid, which involved removing Panneerselvam and appointing Palaniswami as the interim chief at that time.

The High Court observed that no prima facie case for grant of injunction has been made out by the appellants in respect of the Special Resolution expelling them from the primary membership of the party. In that context, it was said that, "In our opinion, no prima facie case for grant of injunction has been made out by the appellants in respect of the Special Resolution expelling them from the primary membership of the party and hence, the question of balance of convenience tested on the anvil of irreparable injury need not be gone into,". In light of the same, it was held that no case was made out for grant of interim injunction against the Special Resolution expelling the appellants from the membership of the Party, pending disposal of the suits.

Regarding the issue of the conduct of the election for the post of general secretary, the Court took the considered view based on the previous premise of the order passed by the Supreme Court that, "Any injunction with respect to the validity of these resolutions would mean that a pre-11.07.2022 situation would have to be put in place and this would also mean that till the suit is completed, the party would face a situation of being without leadership as there would be no general secretary which also cannot be permitted."

In furtherance of the same, the Bench also added that "this would mean that the party would have to be run under the Joint leadership of the Co-ordinator and Joint Co-ordinator which was not practically working out, and which led to the change in scenario. That apart, when the meeting dated 11.07.2022 was convened and has now received the stamp of approval of the Apex Court, the resolutions adopted therein, most importantly relating to electing the General Secretary on the lines of restoring single leadership of the party, as has been the apparent majority wish, cannot be scuttled, before trial,".

Accordingly, the appeals were dismissed.

Cause Title: O. Panneerselvam v. All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam & Ors.

Click here to read/download the Judgment