FR case against tenant ejecting owner

By Telles Anandappa

A Bench comprising of Justices Shirani Bandaranayake, Raja Fernando and Andrew Somawansa granted leave to proceed in a fundamental rights petition filed by a mechanical engineer whose parents were allegedly forcibly evicted from their own house by the tenant.

The petitioner Manthi Sri Lal Perera of Colombo 5 has cited the tenant Ananda Senaka Malagoda, eight police officers from the Narahenpita Police and three fiscal officers among the 19 respondents.

The petitioner stated that his 87-year-old father Morris Perera was the owner of premises No. 36, and 36A Siripa Road, Thimbirigasyaya and that his father left the country for employment abroad leaving the premises in charge of his brother-in law Ranjith Hapangama.

The petitioner stated that in 1980 when his father returned to the country Mr. Hapangama declined to act as the person in charge of the said premises due to old age. Subsequently an attorney-at-law Senaka Malalgoda, was granted power of attorney.

The petitioner said that house no.36 was occupied by a tenant and two of the rooms given to Mr. Malalgoda for his use on condition that when the owner needed the rooms he had to vacate them. He further stated that when the tenant vacated the premises in 1983 Mr. Malalgoda came into occupation without the permission of the owner.

The petitioner alleged that he came to know that Mr. Malalgoda, using his power of attorney, had sold another property on Eswari Road belonging to his father and he had lodged a complaint over that with the CID and the police.

In November last year Mr. Malalgoda together with fiscal officers, policemen from Narahenpita station and a group of thugs had arrived at the premises and forcibly evicted his parents and dumped their household goods on the street. The petitioner claimed that an interim order issued by the Magistrate’s Court effective for premises no. 36 which stated that the parents of the petitioner were entitled to occupy the rooms allotted to them from the inception had been violated by the respondents.