SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(SRI)(SC) 12666

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE DEMOCRATIC SOCIALIST REPUBLIC OF SRI LANKA In the matter of an appeal under and in terms of Section 5C(1) of the High Court of the Provinces (Special Provisions) Act, No. 19 of 1990 as amended by the High Court of the Provinces (Special Provisions) (Amendment) Act, No. 54 of

2006.

SC Appeal No. 166/2016 SC/HCCA/LA 130/2016 Appeal No: WP/HCCA/Col/192/2007(F)

DC Colombo Case No:25471/MR Jagath Udaya Samarawickrama, No. 229/1, Siddhamulla, Piliyandala.

PLAINTIFF Vs.

1. Hettiarachchige Ariyadasa, No. 157/1, Pannipitiya Road, Thalawathugoda.

2. Thisa Walangu Mudiyanselage Nandawathi Kumarihami No. 157/1, Pannipitiya Road, Thalawathugoda.

3. People’s Bank, Colombo 1 DEFENDANTS And Between Jagath Udaya Samarawickrama, No. 229/1, Siddhamulla, Piliyandala.

PLAINTIFF – APPELLANT Vs.

1. Hettiarachchige Ariyadasa, No. 157/1, Pannipitiya Road, Thalawathugoda.

2. Thisa Walangu Mudiyanselage Nandawathi Kumarihami All of No. 157/1, Pannipitiya Road, Thalawathugoda.

3. People’s Bank, Colombo 1.

DEFENDANTS – RESPONDENTS

1A. Hettiarachchige Nirosha Chinthamani Ariyadasa

1B. Hettiarachchige Osmand Ariyadasa.

1C. Hettiarachchige Lakshman Ariyadasa.

SUBSTITUTED 1ST DEFENDANT – RESPONDENTS And now between

1A. Hettiarachchige Nirosha Chinthamani Ariyadasa

1B. Hettiarachchige Osmand Ariyadasa.

1C. Hettiarachchige Lakshman Ariyadasa.

SUBSTITUTED 1ST DEFENDANT – RESPONDENTS – APPELLANTS

2. Thisa Walangu Mudiyanselage Nandawathi Kumarihami All of No. 157/1, Pannipitiya Road, Thalawathugoda.

Presently at No. 571/3, Madiwela Road, Thalawathugoda.

2ND DEFENDANT – RESPONDENT – APPELLANT Vs.

Jagath Udaya Samarawickrama, No. 229/1, Siddhamulla, Piliyandala.

PLAINTIFF – APPELLANT – RESPONDENT Before: P. Padman Surasena, J Kumudini Wickremasinghe, J Arjuna Obeyesekere, J Counsel: J. A. J. Udawatte with Anuradha Ponnamperuma for the Substituted

1st Defendant – Respondents – Appellants and 2nd Defendant –

Respondent – Appellant G. Wijemanne for the Plaintiff – Appellant – Respondent Argued on: 9th September 2024 Written Tendered by the Substituted 1st Defendant – Respondents –

Submissions: Appellants and the 2nd Defendant – Respondent – Appellant on 10th November 2016 and 27th September 2024 Tendered by the Plaintiff – Appellant – Respondent on 22nd December

2016 and 24th September 2024 Decided on: 25th November 2024 Obeyesekere, J This is an appeal filed by the Substituted 1st Defendant – Respondents – Appellants and the 2nd Defendant – Respondent – Appellant [the Defendants] against the judgment delivered on 18th February 2016 by the Provincial High Court of Colombo exercising Civil Appellate jurisdiction [the High Court]. Leave to appeal was granted on

19th September 2016 on six questions of law, to which I shall refer to later.

Lease Agreement – P1 The 1st Defendant, who passed away while this matter was pending before the High Court and his wife the 2nd Defendant were the owners of premises bearing assessment number 571/3, Madiwela Road, Thalawathugoda. The 1st and 2nd Defendants entered into Lease Agreement No. 99 on 22nd May 1999 [P1] with the Plaintiff – Appellant – Respondent [the Plaintiff] in respect of the ground floor of a partially completed building situated at the said premises.

In terms of the said Agreement P1, the parties had agreed as follows:

(a) The period of the lease shall be five years commencing on 1st June 1999 and ending on 31st May 2004;

(b) Possession of the premises shall be handed over to the Plaintiff on 1st June 1999; (c) The Plaintiff shall make an advance payment of Rs. 300,000 in two tranches of Rs. 100,000 and Rs. 200,000, with the latter tranche being paid by 31st August

1999;

(d) While the lease rental shall be a sum of Rs. 10,000 per month, the Plaintiff shall pay the Defendants a sum of Rs. 7000 every month having deducted a sum of Rs.

3000 against the advance payment;

(e) As the building was only partially complete, the Plaintiff is entitled to carry out the necessary improvements from the aforementioned sum of Rs. 200,000 and pay

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top