Somawardena v. Saranelis Singho (F. N. D. Jayasuriya, J.)
rejected as false the respondent’s position and the testimonyadduced on his behalf, I hold that there has been a very judicious,analytic, critical and correct evaluation of the totality of the evidenceled in this case.
There is no misdirection in point of fact of law, there is no failure onthe part of the Assistant Commissioner to take into account andconsider the effect of relevant evidence led at the inquiry, there is noimproper evaluation of evidence and there is no defect of procedure,on a consideration of the totality of the evidence led and on aconsideration of his order. In the result, I hold that there is no error oflaw arising upon this appeal. The Assistant Commissioner has arrivedat strong findings of fact with which this Court is in completeagreement. Thus, applying the ratio decidendi in Babanis v. Jamis(6).I hold that this Court has no jurisdiction or power to interfere with thecorrect finding of fact reached by the Assistant Commissioner. In theresults, I proceed to dismiss this appeal with costs in a sum ofRs. 3,150/- payable by the respondent-appellant to the substitutedapplicant-respondent. The appeal is dismissed with costs.
Appeal dismissed.