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

SANSONI, SINNETAMBY, JJ
PERERA – Appellant
Versus
ZAINUDEEN – Respondent


Advocates:
H. V. Perera, Q. C., with P. Navaratnarajah and S. Sharvananda, for the plaintiffs-appellants.
C. Ranganathan, with E. A. G. de Silva, for the defendant-respondent.

Perera V. Zainudeen

1962 Present:  Sansoni, J., and Sinnetamby, J.

J. E. PERERA

and another, Appellants, and M. M. ZAINUDEEN,
Respondent

S. C. 355-D. C. Colombo, 41,477/M.

Sale of sweep tickets-Term of prescription for recovery of value-Meaning of expressions " chose in action" and " goods "-Sale of Goods Ordinance, s. 59- Prescription Ordinance, ss. S, 10.

The plaintiffs, who were the trustees of the Galle Gymkhana Club, sold to the defendant, a member of the club, 20,000 sweep tickets priced at fifty cents each and sought, in the present action, to recover the value of the tickets. The defendant pleaded prescription.

Held, that the sale was the sale of a chose in action and that section 10, and not section 8, of the Prescription Ordinance was applicable. Section 8 applied only to goods which are capable of being physically delivered and not to the sale of incorporeal things such as a " chose in action ". In the latter case, section 10 applies and the period of prescription would be three years.

APPEAL from a judgment of the District Court, Colombo.

H. V. Perera, Q. C., with P. Navaratnarajah and S. Sharvananda, for the plaintiffs-appellants.

C. Ran





















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