( 271 )
In this case plaintiff sued in Kandy his paraveni tenants resid-ing in other districts for damages for breach of duty which plaintiffaverred should have been performed in Kandy.
It may be that the Court in Kandy has jurisdiction, but it wouldbe hard if defendants were obliged to go personally to Kandy atevery step of the action.
The defendants should not have sent the answer to the Com-missioner, but to the Chief Clerk. I see no irregularity in sendingit by post. Section 809 requires a defendant to deliver to theChief Clerk an answer in writing duly stamped, and I am of opinionthat delivery through the post is sufficient. Every appeal whichreaches the Supreme Court reaches it by the hand of the postman.Rules of process and procedure are surely meant for the maintenanceof justice and order. They must not be turned into means ofoppression. It would be oppression to force the personal deliveryof an answer by defendants who live at a great distance. At thetrial, I hope the claim plaintiff makes for so many journeys andservices will be carefully scrutinized. The defendants are entitledto the costs of this appeal.
December 2.Lawsjx, J.