AIADMK membership must have been renewed every five years on payment of ₹10 to enable a member to file a civil suit: HC

An All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (AIADMK) member who had failed to renew her/his membership once in five years on payment of ₹10, along with the renewal application, is not entitled to institute a civil suit regarding the party affairs, the Madras High Court has held.

Justice P.B. Balaji refused to accept the argument that non payment of the nominal fee would not result in forfeiture of membership. He said, such an argument could be accepted only if Rule 5(vi) of the party bylaws did not require the membership to be renewed every five years on payment of ₹10.

“A proper and harmonious reading of the bylaws clearly indicates that the membership is valid only for a period of five years and the bylaws require a fresh application to be made for renewal at the end of the five year period along with a payment of ₹10. Admittedly, this has not been done by the plaintiff in the instant case,” the judge said.

The observations were made while allowing a civil revision petition filed by AIADMK general secretary Edappadi K. Palaniswami challenging a city civil court’s July 31, 2025 order refusing to reject a civil suit filed by one S. Suriyamoorthy questioning the authority of Mr. Palaniswami to lead the party.

Representing the revision petitioner, senior counsel Vijay Narayan and advocate Narmadha Sampath, assisted by K. Gowtham Kumar, argued the plaintiff had no locus standi to file the suit since his membership had expired in 2018 and he had failed to renew it. Yet, the civil court had ignored the fact, the counsel complained.

Finding force in their arguments, the judge said, the plaintiff had got enrolled himself as a member of AIADMK in 2008 and duly renewed his membership in 2013 for a period of another five years in accordance with the bylaws. However, since he had failed to renew the membership thereafter, he would certainly suffer disqualification, the judge ruled.

Further, referring to Rule 5(ii) of the bylaws which states that any person who associates herself/himself with any other political organisation would forfeit the membership of AIADMK, the judge said, the plaintiff would stand disqualified from party membership on this ground too.

Justice Balaji agreed with Mr. Narayan that the plaintiff had indeed contested as a candidate of MGR Makkal Katchi against Mr. Palaniswami in Edappadi constituency in the 2021 Legislative Assembly elections and thereby “he had invited upon himself forfeiture of membership from AIADMK in terms of Rule 5(ii).”

Though it was argued on behalf of the plaintiff that he had contested the 2021 elections only as an independent candidate, the judge relied upon the Election Commission of India records to hold: “It is amply evident that the plaintiff had contested the Assembly elections in 2021 only on behalf of MGR Makkal Katchi and not as an independent candidate.”

The judge concluded his verdict saying: “The conduct of the plaintiff is therefore clear that the plaintiff has shifted allegiance from his former party, namely AIADMK, and moved over to MGR Makkal Katchi. Strangely, despite all these, the plaintiff claims that he continues to be a member of AIADMK party and therefore asserts that he is entitled to maintain the suit as prayed for. I am unable to agree with the submissions.”