Category / NLR_V_02
WIKRAMATILLAKA v. MARIKAR et al
005-NLR-NLR-V-02-WIKRAMATILLAKA-v.-MARIKAR-et-al.pdf ( 9 ) WIKRAMAT1LLAKA ». MARIKAR et oLD. G„ Colombo, 5,711. K)ivU Procedure Code, s. 247—Misjoinder of parties—Technical objectionsin judicial proceedings. A gifted a parcel of land to B, C, and D. On a writ sued out byplaintiff against A the parcel of land donated was seized, and-advertised for sale. B and C…
CHIVAKANNIPILLAI v. CHUPPRAMANIAN
021-NLR-NLR-V-02-CHIVAKANNIPILLAI-v.-CHUPPRAMANIAN.pdf ( 60 ) 1896. June 3. Bonseb, C.J, CHIVAKANNIPILLAI v. CHUPPRAMANIAN t P. C., Point Pedro, 2,210. ( Crown costs—Maintenance—Ordinance No. 19 of 1889, 8. 3. An applicant for an order of maintenance under seotion 3 ofOrdinance No. 19 of 1889 cannot be condemned in Crown costsunder chapter XIX. of the Criminal Procedure…
KIRIWANTE v. GANETIRALA
037-NLR-NLR-V-02-KIRIWANTE-v.-GANETIRALA.pdf 1896. February 1 j.and March 31. ( 92 ) KIRIWANTE' v. GANETTRALA. D. C., Kandy, 8,185. Kandyan Law—Diga married woman—Her right to share, equally withher brothers, in her mother's estate. Plaintiff, a Kandyan, woman married in diga, claimed a share,equally with her brothers, in certain lands winch belonged to hermother’s estate. Plaintiff’s parents…
RATWATTE v. OWEN
053-NLR-NLR-V-02-RATWATTE-v.-OWEN.pdf ( 141 ) RATWATTE v. OWEN.D. C., Kandy, 10,263. 18961 July9ani]4. Amendment of pleadings—Principle by which Courts ought to be guided—Discretion of the Court as to amendment—Alteration of plaint notfollowed by alteration of answer—Settling of issues—Civil Pro-cedure Code, s. 93. Parties to a suit have no. right to amend the pleadings : it…
HETUHAMY v. MUDELIHAMY et al
069-NLR-NLR-V-02-HETUHAMY-v.-MUDELIHAMY-et-al.pdf ( 176 ) 1896. September 8. HETUHAMY v. MUDELIHAMY et al. P. C., Kigalla, No. 15,754. The Village Communities' Ordinance, 1889, 8. 6—Rules by inhabitants ofdivision within the operation of the Ordinance—Possessing or draw*ing toddy—IUict sale of arrack.* It is ultra vires of the inhabitants of a local district broughtwithin the operation of…
FERNANDO v. THE SYNDICATE BOAT COMPANY, LIMITED
085-NLR-NLR-V-02-FERNANDO-v.-THE-SYNDICATE-BOAT-COMPANY,-LIMITED.pdf ( 206 ) 1806. November <5. FERNANDO v. THE SYNDICATE BOAT COMPANY, <LIMITED. D. C., Colombo, 6,958. Judgment in a civil suit—Delivery of judgment by District Judge on hisre-appointment after his tenure of office during which he had heardevidence had terminated—The Courts Ordinance, 1889i s. 89—Decree—By whom it may be drawn up and…
MUDIYANSE v. RAHMAN
101-NLR-NLR-V-02-MUDIYANSE-v.-RAHMAN.pdf ( 235 ) MUDIYANSE v. RAHMAN. C. R., A nuradhapura, 1,202. Landlord and tenant—Jurisdiction of Court of Requests—Action for rentand ejectment of tenant—Tenant having title to tenement at termina-tion of tenancy superior to that of landlord. Where a contract of tenancy is legally determined, the landlord' may sue the tenant in the Court…
KARONCHIHAMI v. ANGOHAMY et al
117-NLR-NLR-V-02-KARONCHIHAMI-v.-ANGOHAMY-et-al.pdf ( 276 ) KARONCfflHAMI v. ANGOHAMI et al. D. G., Kandy, 6,563. Marriage of persons living in adultery—Illegitimate children—Donation —Gift to concubine—Ordinances Nos. 6 of 1847 and 21 of 1844. A man After the death of his wife cannot lawfully marry a womanwith whom he had been living in adultery during the lifetime…
SASTRY VALAIDER ARONEGARY and his wife v. SEMBECUTTY VAIGALIE et al
133-NLR-NLR-V-02-SASTRY-VALAIDER-ARONEGARY-and-his-wife-v.-SEMBECUTTY-VAIGALIE-et-al.pdf ( 322 ) 1881. February 3 and 4. Privy Council, February 3 and 4, 1881. SASTRY VALAIDER ARONEGARY and his Wife v.SEMBECUTTY VAIGALIE et ad. On appeal from the Supreme Court of Ceylon. Present:—Sir B. Peacock, Montague E. Smith, Sir K.Collieb, Sir Richard Couch. Law of Ceylon—Presumption of marriage—Onus proban di. According to…
FERNANDO v. PERERA et al
149-NLR-NLR-V-02-FERNANDO-v.-PERERA-et-al.pdf ( 369 ) ♦ FERNANDO v. PERERA et al.D. C., Kalutara, 1,567. 1897. July23 <t> 27. Partition Ordinance—Decree under it—Bights of the Crown. A decree under section 9 of the Partition Ordinance of 1863would not bind the Crown. rj^HE facts of the case appear ip the judgment. Dorhhorst, for appellant. Wendt and Sampayo,…