Court : Sri Lanka Supreme Court
Suresh Chandra, J: This is an appeal from the Order of the Civil Appellate High Court holden at Colombo which had affirmed the Order of the District Court of Colombo. The Plaintiff-Respondent had filed action against the 1st and 2nd Defendants-Appellants in the District Court of Colombo to recover damages in a sum of Rs. 2,000,000/- as a result of receiving injuries due to a motor traffic accident. The case had gone ex-parte against the Appellants and judgment had been entered in favour of the Plaintiff- Respondent. The said Appellants objected to the ex-parte decree and sought to set aside the said decree and moved to tender their answer. The Court had held an inquiry into the said application of the Appellants and had made order setting aside the ex-parte order and allowed the Appellants to tender their answer. Thereafter the Plaintiff- Respondent had made an application to add the 3rd Defendant-Appellant as a Defendant in terms of S.18 of the Civil Procedure Code. The basis of the s...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Sri Lanka Supreme Court
Sripavan. J: The 1st Plaintiff-Appellant-Petitioner represented by the 2nd Plaintiff- Appellant -Petitioner(hereinafter referred to as the "Appellants") as next friend instituted this action against the Defendants-Respondents- Respondents (hereinafter referred to as the Respondents) praying for a declaration of title to the land morefully described in the Schedule "C " to the plaint, for ejectment of the Respondents thereupon, damages and costs. The Respondents in their answer sought a declaration against the Appellants on the basis that the property which is the subject matter of this action is held by the Appellants in trust and that the Appellants be ordered to execute a conveyance in their favour on payment of a sum of Rs. 4200/- (Rs. 2100/- being the loan installment and Rs. 2100/- being the interest) referred to in Deed Nos. 14542 and 15702. The learned trial judge dismissed the Appellants action on 21.09.1993 with costs and made order that the Respondents to pay a sum of Rs. 420...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Sri Lanka Supreme Court
Priyasath Dep, J: This appeal is from the order of the Western Province High Court exercising Civil Appellate jurisdiction setting aside the order of the District Court of Colombo in a Testamentary case bearing No. DC Colombo 29793/T. The Appeal was taken up for hearing on 4-8-2011 and oral submissions were concluded. At the hearing the counsel agreed that the only question of law that is relevant for the judgment is as follows: "Whether their Lordship, the Judges of the High Court have erred in law when granting relief not sought by the Petitioner -Petitioner-Respondent in the High Court, in so much as approving a purported Scheme of Distribution which was not even considered by District Judge." In this case the deceased Meemanage Wilfred Fernando died on 19th March 1984 without leaving a will. The Petitioner Saputantrige Nandawathi who is the wife of the deceased Meemanage Wilfred Fernando instituted proceedings in the District Court of Colombo seeking letters of administration to ad...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Sri Lanka Supreme Court
Dr. Shirani A. Bandaranayake, CJ. This is an application for Special Leave to Appeal from the judgment of the Court of Appeal dated 10-02-2010. By that judgment the Court of Appeal dismissed the petitioner-petitioner's (hereinafter referred to as the petitioner) application for Writs of Certiorari and Mandamus to quash the order made in Gazette Notification dated 23-10-1991 and an order directing the 1st respondent to divest the petitioner's land. Being aggrieved by the said judgment the petitioner came before this Court, by way of a Special Leave to Appeal Application. The petitioner had filed his application for Special Leave to Appeal on 22.03.2010 and thereafter had made an application to file amended caption by his motion dated 21-09-2010, which had been allowed and the Special Leave to Appeal application was fixed for support on 06-12-2010. The respondents-respondents (hereinafter referred to as the respondents) by their motion dated 10-10-2010, had moved this Court that the peti...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Sri Lanka Supreme Court
Priyasath Dep. PC. J. In this application 1st Petitioner is the mother of a minor child who is the 2nd Petitioner in this application and has filed this application complaining of a violation of Article 12(1) of the Constitution when dealing with an application for admission of the 2nd Petitioner, to Mahamaya Balika Vidyalaya, Kandy. The 1st Respondent, Principal Mahamaya Balika Vidyalaya filed an affidavit objecting to the reliefs claimed by the Petitioners. It is observed that the Petitioners have not filed a counter affidavit controverting the averments in the 1st Respondent's affidavit notwithstanding the fact that the Court gave them an opportunity to do so. The 1st Petitioner submitted an application for the admission of the 2nd Petitioner in respect of Year 1 Admissions for the year 2009. The Petitioner has applied under the Circular dealing with school admissions and published by the Secretary Ministry of Education who is the 5th Respondent in this case. A copy of the Circular ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Sri Lanka Supreme Court
Priyasath Dep PC, J: This is fundamental rights application pertaining to an admission of a student to year 1 class of a National School. The 1st Petitioner is the father of the 2nd petitioner (minor), on whose behalf submitted an application for admission to the year 1 class of Dharmasoka College, Ambalangoda. The 1st Petitioner after submitting the application for admission to the school took necessary steps to get the 2nd Petitioner admitted to the above school. The first respondent is the Principal of the school and 2nd to 5th Respondents are the members of the Interview Board. The 6th to 9th Respondents are the members of the Appeal Board (on admission to Year 1, 2011). The 10th Respondent is the Director of National schools and the 11th Respondent is the Hon. Attorney General. The admissions to Government Schools are governed by Circular No. 2010/21 dated 31st May 2011 which was annexed to the Petition as marked P2. The Applicants are furnished with another document referred to a...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Sri Lanka Supreme Court
P.A. Ratnayake, J. This is an appeal made to this Court in terms of Section 5(c)(1) of the High Court of the Provinces (Special Provisions) Act No. 54 of 2006, from the Civil Appellate High Court of the North Central Province. Plaintiff-Respondent-Respondent (hereinafter referred to as the "Respondent") instituted a case against the Defendant-Appellant-Petitioner (hereinafter referred to as the Petitioner) at the District Court of Polonnaruwa to obtain the following reliefs. "(i) a declaration that Permit bearing No. 11/4/1/17A dated 12.07.1991 was a lawful valid permit of the Provincial Land Commissioner; (ii) a declaration that the Respondent was the owner of the land described in the Schedule to the Plaint upon the said Permit; (iii) ejectment of the Appellant and the persons holding under him from the said land and the delivery of the peaceful possession to the Respondent; (iv)damages against the Appellant in a sum of Rs.1,000/- per mensem from the date of the action." The Responde...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Sri Lanka Supreme Court
Priyasath Dep ,PC. J: This is fundamental rights application pertaining to an admission of a student to year 1 class of a National School. The 1st Petitioner is the father of the 2nd petitioner (minor), on whose behalf he submitted an application for admission to the year 1 class of Dharmasoka Vidyalaya, Ambalangoda. The 1st Petitioner after submitting the application for admission to the school took necessary steps to get the 2nd Petitioner admitted to the above school. The first Respondent is the Principal of the school and 2nd to 5th Respondents are the members of the Interview Board. The 6th to 9th Respondents are the members of the Appeal Board (on admissions to Year 1, 2011). The 10th Respondent is the Director of Nation Schools and the 11th Respondent is the Hon. Attorney General. The admissions to Government Schools are governed by Circular No. 2010/21 dated 31st May 2011 which was annexed to the Petition as marked P2. The Applicants are furnished with another document referred...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Sri Lanka Supreme Court
Suresh Chandra, J This is an appeal against the judgment of the Civil Appellate High Court of Colombo regarding the dismissal of the Appellant's application to substitute the Respondent in a Rent and ejectment case. The Appellant filed an action in the District Court of Mount Lavinia against the Defendant (Mrs.Mayadunne) to eject her from premises bearing Assessment No.323, Galle Road, Colombo 06, for arrears of rent and for damages. The case went ex-parte against the said Defendant and after entering decree the Appellant took steps to have the decree executed. The Fiscal reported that the said defendant had died and thereupon the Appellant moved to have the respondent substituted in order to serve the exparte decree by making an application in terms of S.839 of the civil Procedure code, on the basis that the defendant had died without children and without leaving an administrable estate, that the defendant's husband had predeceased her, the Respondent was the next of kin of the defend...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Sri Lanka Supreme Court
Dr. Shirani A. Bandaranayake, CJ. The petitioner, who is a chief Irrigation Engineer attached to the Department of Irrigation, complained that her fundamental right guaranteed in terms of Article 12(1) of the Constitution was violated by the 1st - 4th respondents by the decision taken by them, which was communicated to her by letter dated 29-06-2009 issued by the 4th respondent on behalf of the 1st respondent. Leave to proceed was granted by this Court for the said alleged infringement. The petitioner's grievance, as stated by her is as follows: The petitioner had joined the Sri Lanka Engineering Service (hereinafter referred to as SLES) as a Civil Engineer, Class II / Grade II on 02-12-1996, which was subjected to a 3 year probationary period (P1). She was confirmed in the said position on 10-05-2000 to be with effect from 02-12-1996 (P2). In terms of Section 8 of the Minute of the SLES, if the necessary requirements were fulfilled, the said officer could be promoted to Class II / Gra...
Tag this Judgment!