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

BRITTO v. HEENATIGALA


Britto V. Heenatigala

1956 Present : Gratiaen, J., and Gunasekara, J.

MRS. J. BRITTO,
Appellant, and W. HEENATIGALA,
Respondent.

S. C. 432-D. C. Colombo, 6,532

Rent Restriction Act, No. 29 of 1948-Sections 13 and 27-Letting of co-owned premises- Partition sale thereafter-Does not terminate statutory tenancy-Partition. Ordinance (Cap. 56), ss. 4,8.

The statutory protection of a tenant under the Rent Restriction Act is not automatically extinguished if the leased premises are purchased (either by a co-owner or by a third party) in terms of a decree for sale under the Partition Ordinance.

APPEAL from a judgment of the District Court, Colombo.

H. W. Jayewardene, Q.C., with W. P. N. de Silva, for the defendant appellant.

Sir Lalita Rajapakse, Q.C., with C. G. Weeramantry, for the plaintiff respondent.

Cur. adv. vult.

328

February 27, 1956. GRATIAEN, J.-

The question for our decision on this appeal is whether the statutory protection of a tenant under the Rent Restriction Act No. 29 of 1948 is automatically extinguished if the leased premises are purchased (either by a co-owner or by a third party) in terms of a decree for sale under the Partition Ordinance






















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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top