The Chairman, Sanitary Board V. Kanagaratnam

1922 Present : De Sampayo J.

THE CHAIRMAN, SANITARY BOARD,
v. KANAGARATNAM.

212-P. C. Matale, 17,603.

Appeal Housing and Town Improvement Ordinance, No. 19 of 1951, s 74-"Closing order" prohibiting the use of a building by Magistrate- Appeal to Supreme Court-Tribunal of Appeal

An appeal lies to the Supreme Court from a " closing order " made by a Police Magistrate under section 74 (1) of the Housing and Town Improvement Ordinance, No. 19 of 1915, prohibiting the use of a building for human habitation,

THE facts appear from the judgment.

Jansz, C.C., for respondent, raised the preliminary objection that there was no appeal to the Supreme Court from an order made by the Police Magistrate under section 74 of Ordinance No.. 19 of 1915. The only appeal that is contemplated by the Ordinance is to the special " Tribunal of Appeal " constituted under chapter II.

Spencer Rajaratnam, for accused, appellant.-Ordinance No. 19 of 1915 contemplates two sets of orders. One set made by the Chairman of the local authority appeals from whose orders are taken to the " Tribunal of Appeal '" (see sections 16 and 26): and, the other set of orders made by the Police Magistrate, from whose orders the appeals should be to the " Court of Appeal," section. 74 (6). The Ordinance nowhere gives power to the " Tribunal of Appeal " to revise the orders made by a Police Magistrate. Therefore '' Court of Appeal " must signify something other than the " Tribunal of Appeal," i.e., it signifies the ordinary " Court of Appeal," viz., the Supreme Court. Even if the Ordinance No. 19 of 1915 does not grant the right of appeal to this Court, the Supreme Court is entitled to hear this case in appeal in the exercise of the powers vested in it under section 39 of the Courts Ordinance.

Further he argued on the merits.

Jansz, C.C., for respondent-Though the Supreme Court is entitled to hear this appeal under section 89 of the Courts Ordinance, it will not "exercise that power unless the appellant has a right of appeal. If no right of appeal is provided by Ordinance No. 19 of 1915 from an order under section 74 the. appellant cannot appeal to any Court.

Cur. adv. vult.

June 14, 1922. DE SAMPAYO J.-

This is an appeal from a " closing order " made by the Police section 74 (1) building for human habitation. Crown Counsel Mr. Jansz, appearing for the respondent, the Chairman of the Sanitary Board, objects to the appeal being entertained on the ground that the appeal should be, if at all, to the Tribunal of Appeal constituted by the Ordinance. Sub-section (6) of section 74, under which the order appealed from has been made, enacts as follows:-" Where an appeal is made against a closing order, and such appeal is dismissed or is abandoned, the appellant shall be liable to a line not exceeding Rs. 20 a day during the non-compliance with the order, unless he satisfies the Court before which proceedings are taken for imposing the fine that there was substantial ground for the appeal, and that the appeal was not brought merely for the purpose of delay; and when the appeal is heard, the Court of Appeal may, on dismissing the appeal, impose the fine as if it were the Court before which the summons was returnable."

What is the " Court of Appeal " referred to in this sub-section? The " Court of Appeal " in the ordinary acceptation of the terms is the Supreme Court which, under the Courts Ordinance, has appellate jurisdiction in respect of judgments and orders of the District Courts, the Courts of Requests, and the Police Courts of the Island, and consequently the Ordinance No. 19 of 1915 appears to contemplate appeals to the Supreme Court from " closing orders " made by 3 Police Magistrate under section 74 (1). There is no doubt that section 83 of the Ordinance provides for the constitution of a special " Tribunal of Appeal " consisting of a president and two assessors, but wha

Click Here to Read the rest of this document