COURT OF APPEAL.
EDUSSURIYA, J. (P/CA)
A. Rev. 183/99
C. COLOMBO 6596/RE28th SEPTEMBER, 1999
Rent Act – S. 22(lJ(bb), – S.22(lc) and S. 36 – reasonable requirement -Commissioner tofind, alternative accommodatianfor ‘Such tenant – Deathof tenant when decree is entered-Rights of Tenancy ceases.
The Plaintiff – Petitioner (landlord) instituted action under Section22(l)(bb) of the Rent Act on the ground that he reasonably required thepremises, and obtained Judgment. However in terms of S. 22(lc) Writ ofExecution was not to issue until the Commissioner of National Housingnotified Court that he is able to provide alternative accommodation for"such tenant."
After the death of the Tenant the Petitioner made an application for Writ,which was refused.
On decree being entered in favour of the Plaintiff, tenancy wasterminated.
Tenant’ Judgment Debtor had ifb right of tenancy thereafter towhich his heirs could succeed.
The word Tenant’ is used in S. 22(lc) to identify the person towhom the Commissioner of National Housing should providealternate accommodation.
Commissioner has to provide,^'accommodation to such tenantonly – that is the person who was the tenant until the tenancy wasterminated.
Sqffeeya v. Jamad(Edussfjrtya, J.)
(5) The Rights of tenancy ceased on the decree being entered andtherefore Section 36 would not apply.
APPLICATION in Revision from the Order of the District Court ofColombo.
Cases referred to :
1. LeelawtL'hie Vs. Monel Ratnayake 1998 3 SLR 349.
October 29, 1999.
EDUSSURIYA, J. (P/CA)The Plaintiff-Petitioner-Landlord had Instituted actionunder Section 22( 1) (bb) of the Rent Act on the ground that hereasonably required the premises in suit for occupation as aresidence, and obtained judgment. However, as per Section22(1 c) of the Rent Act writ of execution of the decree was notto issue until the Commissioner of National Hoiising notifiedto Court that he is able to provide alternate acc<nnoc^*^h for"such tenant".
The tenant died in 1992 as admitted by the Respondent'sCounsel.c
Thereafter the Plaintiff-Petitioner-Landlord-JudgmentCreditor made an application for writ which was refused on theground that the widow <Jiad succeeded to the tenancy.
On decree beingc entered in favour of the Plaintiff-Petitioner the tenancy wasC^miinated, but writ was not toissu^ as per Section 22(lc). Thus, the "tenant" judgmentdebtor had no right of tenancy thereafter to which his heirscould succeed.
S. Kanagc&^igham for Plaintiff-Petitioner.
K. Deektriweera for Defendent Respondent
Cur. adv. vult.
 2 Sri L.R.
Sri Lanka Law Reports
Although the word "tenant" is used in Section 22(lc)it does not mean that the defendant tenant had any rightsof tenancy after decree was entered in favour of the Landlord.It is used therein to identify the person to whom theCommissioner of National Housing should provide alternateaccomodation.
The Plaintiff-Petitioner's counsel contended that the widowof the judgment debtor was substituted only foriHe purposeof the execution proceedings.
Further, the Commissioner of National Housing is underan obligation under Section 22(1 c) to provide alternateaccomodation to "such tenant" only. That is the person whowas the tenant until the tenancy was terminated by the decreeof Court.
I may also refer to the decision in the case of Leelmvathievs. Monel Ratnayake111 where the Supreme Court held that anapplication under Section 13 of the Ceiling on HousingProperty Law to purchase a premises could not be continuedby a party substituted under Section 36 of the Rent Act as theright to purchase the premises was personal to the tenant whomade the application.
^qjhe other hand, In this case before me, the rights oftenancjr ceased on the decree being entered and thereforeSection 36 of the Rent Act clearly does not apply in such asituation. Besides, as set out hereinbefore in terms of Section22(lc) the Commissioner of National Housing is bound toprovide alternate accomodation to "such tenant" only.
For the above mentioned reasons, the order of the learnedAdditional District Judge dated 26th October 1998 refusingthe application for issue of writ for the execution of the decreeis set aside with costs and the application for the issue ofwrit to execute the said decree/-;/ allowed with costs fixed atRs. 5250/.
SAFFEEYA v. JAMAD