PUTRAJAYA, March 26 ― The High Court erred in rejecting Senator S. Nallakarupan statement of defence in Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim's RM60 million defamation suit, the Federal Court ruled today.

The apex court then ordered that the case be returned to the High Court where it will go to trial.

“Striking out is only applicable in a plain and obvious matter,” said Chief Judge of Malaya Tan Sri Zulkefli Ahmad Makinuddin when making the order today.

Zulkefli was part of a five-man bench that included Tan Sri Suriyadi Halim Omar, Datuk Hasan Lah, Datin Paduka Zaleha Zahari and Datuk Jeffrey Tan Kok Wha.

Kuala Lumpur High Court Judge Datuk Su Geok Yiam, on June 19, 2012, struck out Nallakaruppan's statement of defence over a failure to furnish the required particulars in the case, and ruled that the latter was liable for the statements against the opposition leader.

Nallakaruppan, who is president of the Malaysian Indian United Party (MUIP), appealed the decision, but lost this in the Court of Appeal on August 2, last year.

Anwar sued Nallakaruppan, who was once a close friend, over allegedly defamatory remarks made by the latter in two articles titled “Anwar terima RM60 juta” (Anwar receives RM60 million) published in newspapers Mingguan Malaysia and Sinar Harian in August, 2008.

In the offending articles, Nallakaruppan accused Anwar of receiving RM60 million from him and also from gaming company Magnum Corporation Berhad.

Anwar won when Nallakaruppan failed to state who gave the money, when and where they were given.

Nallakaruppan's lawyer, Tan Sri Muhammad Shafee Abdullah, argued today that "because one cannot remember with precision of particulars, it is not because he is unwilling but it is because he is unable to furnish the exact details."

“The transitions had taken place in various stages... these were back-alley payments... but the naivety of the appellate court... they had asked for audited or statement of accounts.

“Back-alley payments are never captured,” said Shafee, taking a swipe at the Court of Appeal's decision against his client. Zulkelfi and Zaleha were among the five-member panel at the appeal's stage of the case.

“This is not a case where the person did not provide the information but the person could not do so... it is a totally oppressive application,” he added.

Anwar's lawyer, R. Sivarasa, then pointed out that the money Anwar had purportedly received “was a huge sum”.

“There were conflicting statements, first in the newspaper he (Nallakaruppan) the money was passed in his own hands, then he changed it saying that it was delivered,” said Sivarasa.

“It is a huge sum of money and we must know when and where, the transaction happened,” he said, in reply.

After hearing the submissions, the apex court agreed with Shafee's argument that Nallakaruppan's claims that Anwar received RM60 million surreptitiously “was not an obvious case”. It also ordered Anwar to pay Nallakaruppan RM20,000 in costs.