Justice Su Tiang Joo said Sundra had proven his case against PAM on a balance of probabilities.

“The defendant (PAM) failed in their defences of justification and fair comment,” the judge said when announcing his decision.

Su ruled that PAM had published the impugned article maliciously and added that the award included aggravated damages.

He also awarded Sundra RM100,000 in costs.

The judge ordered PAM to publish a notice in the online editions of The Star and Berita Harian disassociating itself from the impugned article within two weeks from today.

In addition, PAM was ordered to remove the offending article from a WhatsApp group within seven days.

An injunction was also granted to restrain PAM from further publishing the same or similar defamatory content.

Sundra had in December 2017 written an article titled “Consequences and Flaws to the Certificate of Completion and Compliance: Comparative Analysis with Proposed Solutions”, which was published by the Malayan Law Journal.

PAM’s defamatory statements were contained in an article titled “Refuting unsubstantiated and misleading claims on flaws of certificate of completion and compliance” published in November 2018 in response to Sundra’s article.

In his suit, Sundra had claimed that PAM’s article contained statements about him that were “plainly false, untrue, unwarranted, unsubstantiated, malicious, mischievous” and constituted a “grave and serious libel”.

Sundra, a professional architect and registered town planner, said PAM’s president, Ezumi Harzani, had also shared the defamatory article in a WhatsApp group which had more than 200 participants.

Counsel Rueben Mathiavaranam and Sumita Balasubramaniam represented Sundra, while David Lingam, Kamaldip Kaur and Depinder Kaur acted for PAM.