100-NLR-NLR-V-45-WEERASINGHE-Appellant-and-AZEEZ-Respondent.pdf
DE KRETSER J.— Weerasinghe and Azeez.
381
•1944Present: de Kretser J..WEERASINGHE, Appellant, and AZEEZ, Respondent.
C. R. Colombo, 93,747.
Rentrestriction—Order of Court ofRequests—Right ofappeal—Ordinance
No. 60 of 1942, s. 8.
The existing right of appeal from a judgment of the Court of Requestsis not affected by the Bent Restriction Ordinance.
A PPEAL from a judgment of the Commissioner of Requests, Colombo.
E. B. Wikremanayake, for appellant.
G. Thomas, for respondent.
July 21, 1944. de Kretser J.—
A preliminary objection was taken to the hearing of this appeal on theground that no appeal lay and the remarks of Soertsz J. in C. R. Colombo,93,851, Supreme Court Minutes, July 17, 1944, were read to me. Thoseremarks were made obiter and now an objection has been taken expressly.Section 12, sub-section (12) definitely says that the order of the Board ofAssessment shall be final and conclusive. When we turn to section 8,•that section does not give the right to the landlord to sue the tenant forejectment. That is a right which he has independent of the Ordinance.What that section does is to curb his right and to limit it to certaincircumstances.
382
HOWARD C.J.—The King v. Amarakoon.
In my opinion, therefore, the right of appeal which existed previouslyis not affected by the Ordinance and I decided to hear the appeal. Havingsread the evidence and heard Counsel I find no reason to differ from theconclusion arrived at by the learned Commissioner.
The appeal is dismissed with costs.
Appeal dismissed.