Parmsoty V. Veenayagamoorthy Et Al.,

1943 Present: Moseley and Keuneman JJ.

PARMSOTY, Appellant, and VEENAYAGAMOORTHY et al.

262-D. C. Jaffna, 15,713.

Tort-Action for damages to car-Ownership of car-Defence of justification at Law-Negligence of defendant.

Where a person brings an action for damages caused to a car by the negligence of the defendant and for personal injuries caused to himself it would be sufficient in order to sustain his cause of action if he has only a limited interest in the car.

Where the defendant has discharged the onus laid upon him of proving that his act was justified by law, it is open to the plaintiff to prove that the defendant is not entitled to th6 protection of the law because the powers conferred upon him by statute were exercised negligently.

APPEAL from a judgment of the District Judge of Jaffna.

The facts appear from the headnote and the argument.

L. A. Rajapakse (with him C. T. Olegasegaram), for the plaintiff, appellant. The plaintiff's claim has been dismissed chiefly on the ground that the plaintiff was not the owner of the car in question. It is submitted that the evidence in the case sufficiently proves the own

Click Here to Read the rest of this document