046-NLR-NLR-V-58-HEEN-BANDA-Petitioner-and-W.-H.-BUS-COMPANY-LIMITED-Respondent.pdf
1956Present: Basnayake, C.J., and K. D. de* Silva, J.HEEN BANDA, Petitioner, and W. H. BUS COMPANY LIMITED.
Respondent
S. C. 424—Application for Conditional Leave to appeal to the PrivyCouncil in- S. C. 23/D. C. Kandy, 3,650
Privy Council—Application for conditional leave to appeal—Respondent a Company—HIode of service of notice of application—Companies Ordinance, s. 331—Appeals(Privy Council) Ordinance, Schedule, Rule 2.V
When a limited linbility company is the respondent to an. application forconditional leave to appeal to the Privy Council, notice as required by Eulo 2of the Pules in tho Schedule to tho Appeals (Privy Council) Ordinance can onlybe given to the Company in the manner prescribed by section 351 of the Com-panies Ordinance, i.e., by being left at or sent by post to the registered officeof tho Company. Notice left at or sent by post to an address which is givenin tho pleadings as tho placo where tho business of tho Company is carriedon, but which is not tho registered offico of the Company, is not sufficient.
PPLICATION for conditional leave to appeal to the Privy Council.S. Sha-rvananda, with J. V. C. Nathaniel, for Defendant-Appellant.
V. Pere-ra, Q.C., with If. D. Thambiah. for Plaintiff-Respondent.
Cur. adv. vult.
May 15, 1956. Basnayake, C.J.—
This application for conditional leave to appeal to the Privy Councilwas opposed on the ground that notice, as required by Rule 2 of the Rulesin the Schedule to the Appeals (Privy Council) Ordinance, has not beengiven. That Rule reads as follows :—
“ Application to the court for leave to appeal shall be made bypetition within thirty days from the date of the judgment to bo ap-pealed from, and the applicant shall, within fourteen days from thodate of such judgment, give the opposite party notice of such intendedapplication.”
It was contended on behalf of the respondent, a limited liability com-pany registered in Ceylon, that notice of this application has not beengiven in the manner prescribed by section 351 of the CompaniesOrdinance. That section reads :—
“ A document may be served on a company by leaving it at or sending
it by post to the registered office of the company. ”
It is admitted that the appellant sent the notice to No. 52 MalabarStreet, Kandy, which is the address given by the respondent in the plaintand is the place where the business of this Company is carried on ; but itwas not the registered office of the Company at the relevant date. Learnedcounsel for the respondent contended that whatever may be the realbusiness place of the Company, a notice can only be given to a limitedliability company by being left at or sent by j>ost to the registered office ofthe Company.
A Company derives its legal status from the statute regulating theregistration of Companies. When that statute prescribes a mode ofservice of documents on a Company that procedure should be followed.In the instant case the notice under Rule 2 of the Rules in the Scheduleto the Appeals (Privy Council) Ordinance has not been left at or sent bypost to the registered office of the respondent Company. The objectionmust therefore be upheld.
The application is refused with costs.
K. D. de Silva, J.—I agree.
Application refused.