( 316 )
July 26, mi
Present: Wood Renton J.
THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL v. CORNELIS.
372—P. C. Panadure, 35,657.
Village Tribunal—Appeal to Assistant Government Agent—Power ofAssistant Government Agent to order new trial before Police Court.
In a criminal case there was an appeal from the Gansabhawa tothe Assistant Government Agent, who directed that there shouldbe a new trial in the Police Court. The Magistrate held that theAssistant Government Agent's order was ultra vires, and that hecould only order a new trial in. the Gansabhawa. •
Held, that the Assistant Government Agent had jurisdiction tomake the order.
When the Assistant Government Agent ordered a new trial, thecase was restored to the roll of the Village Tribunal. Section 28,proviso 3, thereupon became applicable, and enabled the AssistantGovernment Agent to stop the further hearing of the case beforethe Village Tribunal and to direct it to be tried before the PoliceCourt.
FjpHE facts appear sufficiently from the judgment.
Obeyesekere, C.C., for the appellant.—Section 52 of OrdinanceNo. 24 of 1889 empowers the Government Agent in any VillageTribunal case in which either party applies for relief to order anew trial. In the present instance the Government Agent ordereda new trial of Village Tribunal case 4,018 on the application ofthe complainant. The case was thus restored to the roll of theVillage Tribunal. Section 28 (3) empowers the Government Agentto stop further hearing of any case before a Village Tribunal, andto direct it to be tried by the Police Court. The GovernmentAgent, having under section 52 restored the Village Tribunal case4,018 to the roll, was at once empowered under section 28(3)to stop further hearing of that case in the Village Tribunal, anddirect it to be tried by the Police Court.
July 26,1911. Wood Renton J.—
This is an appeal by the Attorney-General against the acquittalof the accused-respondent,-otra charge of theft of coconuts, by thelearned Police Magistrate of Panadure. The case had been origi-nally tried in the Gansabhawa. There was an appeal to the AssistantGovernment Agent, and in terms of section 52 of the VillageCommunities Ordinance, No. 24 of 1889, he directed that there should
( 317 )
be a new trial in the Police Court of Panadure. The learned PoliceMagistrate held that the Assistant Government Agent’s order wasultra vires, and that he could only order a new trial in the Gan-sabhawa under section 52. It appears to me that the view whichthe Police Magistrate has taken Of the law applicable to this case iswrong. When the Assistant Government Agent ordered a new trial,the case was, in effect, restored to the roll of the Village Tribunal.Section 28, proviso 3, thereupon became applicable, and enabledthe Assistant Government Agent to stop the further hearing of thecase before the Village Tribunal, and to direct it to be tried in thePolice Court. I set aside the acquittal, and send the case back fortrial in the Police Court of Panadure.
THE ATTONEY-GENERAL v. CORNELIS