( «K) )1012. where a plaintiff, bona fide and without any intention of evadingthe jurisdiction of the Village Tribunal, claims more than Rs. 20,O.J.but is able to make good bis claim to a part only of bis demand,
j.,,—mfn This is the principle on which Grenier J. decided Raiya Nona andv. Yahavpela another v. Fernando and another 1 and Rodrigo v. Girigoris.2 TheseV*** decisions, in my opinion, are based on a sound interpretation ofsection 34, and they lay down a rule which is at once consonantwith the intention of the Legislature, and calculated to prevent theinconvenience of frequently referring part-heard cases to VillageTribunals.
In the present case there is no finding that the plaintiffs, in claimingdamages for two years, intended to evade the jurisdiction of theVillage Tribunal, and I am not prepared to hold that they had anysuch, intention. Indeed, having regard to the question of lawinvolved, I think that it is fairly clear that they had no suchintention, but were uncertain as to the period for which they couldclaim damages.
I am' in agreement with my brother on the other points withwhich he deals in his judgment, and I entirely concur in his viewthat the circumstance that a trial may incidentally involve a decisionon questions of titles of considerable importance is no bar to a casebeing tried in the Village Tribunal, if the case is otherwise cognizableby a Village Tribunal.
In the present case I am of opinion that it was not the duty ofthe Commissioner of Requests to refer the case to the VillageTribunal, and I would dismiss the appeal and also the cross appealwith costs.
Ennis J.—
I am entirely of the same opinion. The original demand was onewithin the jurisdiction of the Court of Requests, and it was notimpossible for the plaintiff to have recovered more than Rs. 20as damages had the amount been considered apart from the com-mutation value ” of the services. There was no intention to evadethe jurisdiction of the Village Tribunal, and the facts of the caseshow that it did not fall exclusively within the jurisdiction of theVillage Tribunal.
Appeal dismissed.
2 1 Cur. L. R. 191.
* Weerakoon's Rep. 19.