Page images
PDF
EPUB

4.

Registration-Consolidation of two lands-Field and high land
adjoining thereto-Grantee sole owner of one land and owner
of half share of the other.

Two distinct lands, of one of which a person is sole owner and of the other of which he is only entitled to one-half share, cannot be consolidated for purposes of registration without the consent of the owner of the other half share.

But where a field and adjoining high land were treated in the earliest deed produced (P 1 of 1904) as one land, and it was only in recent years the lands were treated as separate lands, the Court held that there was no consolidation of two distinct lands.

"In the later deeds relied on by the defendant the lands have been treated as two separate lands, but that cannot affect the correctness of the description given in P 1."

APPUHAMY V. PETER SINGHO, 55, Court of Requests,
Kurunegala, 25,433

5. Transfer of property subject to mortgage-Failure of mortgagee to register address or lis pendens-Competition between purchaser under mortgage decree and transferree— Lis pendens-Service of summons

6. Mortgage by widow and son for paying of husband's debts— Action by mortgagee No registration of lis pendensPurchase under mortgage decree by defendant-Half land sold on a writ against widow and purchased by plaintiff

7. Sale under mortgage decree--Mortgage action not registered -Lis pendens-Sale under simple money decree--Right of purchaser under mortgage decree to refer back to mortgage bond

..

Reservation--
Road

Residence

Resistence

Res Judicata

Restitutio in integrum

Restitutio in integrum-Settlement-Proctor acting contrary to instructions-Relief given by Supreme Court direct without sending case to District Judge for investigation into allegations in application.

Where a proctor, acting contrary to the instructions of his client, consented to certain terms of settlement, the Supreme Court granted relief by way of restitutio in integrum.

The Supreme Court being satisfied that the proctor acted contrary to instructions gave direct relief without directing the District Judge to investigate the question.

ORR et al. v. GUNATILLEKE et al., District Court,
Ratnapura, 3,229 ..

Rice control

Right of way

9

FAGE

359

121

193

477

[blocks in formation]

178

18

414, 438 18-23

Riparian owners

Riparian owners-Right to dam up stream-Dimage to owner

of land higher up

Road

Roman law

Sale

See VENDOR AND PURCHASER

See SALE OF GOODS

Sale of goods

Search warrant

Secretary, Local Board

Sentence

2.

3.

Servitude

1. Servitude-Not using the path indicated-Abandonment. For a servitude to be lost by abandonment, the abandonment must be deliberate and intentional.

4.

460

136, 182

36

..

NAGAMANI V. VINAYAGAMOORTHY et al., 21, Court of
Requests, Batticaloa, 2,905

Silt carried along drains in defendant's land into a water
channal in plaintiff's field-Blocking of channel-Over-
flowing of silt rendering field useless-Action for damages
-Was it plaintiff's duty to keep channel clear?

Way of necessity-Order to pay a sum annually to keep
defendants' right alive.

Where the Court entered decree granting the plaintiff a way of necessity, and ordering him to pay defendant one rupee per annum to keep the defendants' right alive.

Held, that the order as to payment of a sum annually was inconsistent with the granting of a way of necessity, and remitted the case for the Commissioner to ascertain what should be paid for the way.

KODITUWAKKU et al. v. MANSEER et al., 38, Court of
Requests, Kandy, 28,648

[ocr errors]

Reparian owners- -Right to dam up stream-Damage to
owner of Land higher up

5. Right of co-owner to take carts over common land

Settlement

Silt

Stamp duty

1. Stamp duty-Lease Mortgages affecting more lands than one embodied in leases-Ordinance No. 10 of 1919, Part I., Schedule B.

Mortgages affecting more lands than one embodied in leases are chargeable with the full duty chargeable on mortgages, including the duty leviable in respect of additional lands, and they are not entitled to the benefit of the third proviso to paragraph 31A.

PAGE

WIJESURIYA . SAMARASINGHE, Police Court, Colombo,
42,011

24, 78

29, 33

18

120

438

197

59

460

157

178

197

91

2.

Stamp duty-Deed executed by Muhammadan husband in
favour of wife after marriage for Maggar.

A Muhammadan husband executed a deed in favour of
his wife after the consummation of the marriage for the
Maggar.

Held, that the document should be stamped under item 30
(b) of Stamp Amendment Ordinance, 1919.

In re the Application of GOONESEKERA, Notary
Public

3. Stamp duty-Actions under the Trusts Ordinance, 1917-
Interpretation Ordinance, No. 21 of 1901, s. 10.

Actions relating to public trusts under the Trusts Ordinance, 1917, are liable to stamp duty as actions of the value of Rs. 1,000.

Sub-section 3 of section 116 of the Trusts Ordinance which enacts that all petitions shall bear a stamp of Rs. 10 was designed to provide for proceedings of a special nature by petitions under sections 35, 74, and 76, and other sections of the Trusts Ordinance.

[blocks in formation]

PAGE

351

District Court,

94

4. Stamp Ordinance, s. 50-Application to Police Court to recover deficiency of stamp duty-Does an appeal lie?

Substitution of plaintiff

[ocr errors]

255

Summary trial

Summons

Surety

252

15, 17

..73, 474

1. Surety Beneficium excussionis-Creditor holds securities given by debtor in trust for surety-Surety discharged if securities become valueless owing to dilatoriness or act of creditor-Creditor can call upon surety to guarantee costs of excussion--Extent to which surety is discharged by misfeasance of creditor.

Where a surety has not renounced the beneficium excussionis, the creditor holds all securities given by the debtor in trust for the surety. The surety is discharged if the securities become valueless, not only by the dilatoriness of the creditor, but also by any act on his part; the act must not be a merely negligent act, but must be a positive act on the part of the creditor.

If a creditor can show that there is no reasonable hope of excussion being successful, he is to ask the surety to guarantee his costs of excussion.

The extent to which surety is discharged by the misfeasance of the creditor considered.

WIJEWARDENE v. JAYAWARDENE, 289, District Court,
Colombo, 45,217

2. Security for performance of a judgment or order-Forfeiture
of bond in the same proceeding-Court cannot order surety
to pay more than the amount of the bond.

Where security has been given for the performance by a party to a legal proceeding of a judgment or order in such proceeding, application may be made in the same proceeding

336

for the forfeiture of the bond. Upon such an application
what the Court should do is to order the forefeiture of the
bond, and the forfeiture of the bond implies solely and
simply, unless on equitable grounds some mitigation of the
penalty is ordered-the payment of the penal sum and
nothing else. The Court is not entitled to go beyond the
penal sum and order the surety to pay the actual amount
of the costs.

BABUNAPPUHAMY v. DON DAVITH, 4, District Court,
Tangalla, 1,912

PAGE

Surveyor

Tavern keeper

Tesawalamai

Tesawalamai Property acquired after death of second wife-
Is it acquired property of the second marriage?

S, a Tamil, subject to the Tesawalamai, was married
twice. By his first wife he had a child R, and by his second
wife he had a child V. After the death of the second wife, S
purchased a land at Anuradhapura, and died some time
later. V died in 1917 intestate and issueless.

Held, that on the death of S, the property devolved on
R and V in equal shares, and on the death of V his half
share devolved on R, and no portion devolved on V's
mother's mother.

VELUPILLAI et al. v. MUTTUPILLAI, 14, District Court,
Jaffna, 3,531

Theft

Thoroughfares Ordinance

Leaving cart on the grass by the road side-Road includes reservation-Thoroughfares Ordinance, No. 16 of 1865, s. 53. The leaving of a cart on the grass by the side of the road longer than is required for loading and unloading, &c., is an offence punishable under section 53 (3) of Ordinance No. 16 of 1865.

The term "road

includes land adjoining the road which
was reserved for its protection and benefit.

NAIR v. MALLIS APPU, 331, Police Court, Badulla,
1,088

Trade Marks Ordinance

Trade Marks Ordinance, 1888-Passing off-Both marks having the figure of a female-Possibility of deception of ignorant people by traders-Is that ground for refusing registration?

The appellants and respondents were manufacturers of condensed milk. The respondents' trade mark, registered in 1893, was the figure of a maid with a pail on the head and another in the hand, and their condensed milk was known as the "Milkmaid Brand." The appellants sought to register their mark, which consisted of a female figure carrying a bunch of flowers in one hand and a sword in the other enclosed in an oval with five medals above the figure, and the words of guarantee in thick letters across it, and the word, "Hollandia," displayed beneath. The District

444

183

60

126

248

182

Judge refused the application, on the ground that the use of a female figure by the appellants, though it may not mislead an intelligent and cautious purchaser who knew English, might deceive an unwary purchaser in Ceylon.

Held, that appellant was entitled to register his mark. "The appellants' mark is in itself not calculated to deceive, and there is no evidence whatever that the appellants have any design to facilitate the passing-off of their goods as the goods of the respondents."

"The deception is not in the use of the mark, but in
passing-off of the goods of one person as those of another
by the trader. The remedy in such a case is an action
for damages against the trader, and the mere possibility of
deception by passing-off is not a good ground for refusing
registration of the mark."

HOLLANDIA AND ANGLO-SWISS CONDENSED MILK Co. v.
THE NESTLE AND ANGLO-SWISS CONDENSED MILK
Co., 94, District Court, Colombo, 930

Trespass

1. Action for trespass-Constructive possession of plaintiff. Mere constructive possession is not a sufficient basis for an action for trespass.

DIAS v. NIKKo, 53, Court of Request, Galle, 2,564

2. Shooting trespassing fowls

Trial

PAGE

396

54

65

97, 317

Trust

1. Proof of trust-Oral evidence-Is there a difference between express and resulting trust ?-Ordinance No. 1 of 1840, s. 2. Where a person has obtained possession of a property of another, subject to a trust or condition, and fraudulently claims to hold it free from such trust or condition, he cannot be allowed to claim the advantage of the Statute of Frauds. Where such a state of affairs is alleged, oral evidence may be led to establish the trust.

In the application of this rule, no distinction is drawn
between express and resulting trusts.

RANASINGHE et al. v. FERNANDO et al., 35, District Court,
Negombo, 14,913 .

2. Transfer of property to defraud creditors-Action by heir
of transferror against transferree to recover same-Trust.
Where A transferred his property to B without considera-
tion, and with the object of defrauding his creditors.
Held, that it is open to the heirs of A to sue B for the

same.

ANDRIS v.

PUNCHIHAMY, 78, Court of Requests,

[ocr errors][merged small]

3.

Tangalla, 10,052
Muhammadan charitable trust-Direction by founders that
one of their heirs should be appointed trustee-No direction
as to how the heir is to be chosen

203

390

4.

Stamp duty-Actions under the Trusts Ordinance, 1917-
Interpretation Ordinance, No. 21 of 1901, s. 10.

94

« EelmineJätka »