Court refers KMC car park case for arbitration

The Kandy District Judge allowed an injunction sought by plaintiffs Kandy Property Development and Finance Company Ltd. on a decision taken by respondent the Kandy Municipal Council (KMC) over the leasing of the Municipal Car Park. District Judge Bandula Nissanka Karunaratne also referred the dispute before an Arbitrator.

In this case the plaintiff company, on October 3 2006 had made submissions to the Kandy District Court seeking the intervention by a plaint filed with 27 counts seeking an enjoining order against the decision of the KMC.

The plaintiffs submitted to court that the decision by the Council on September 28, 2006 to terminate the leasing agreement by the Kandy Municipal Car Park be made null and void and that the Council had no legal right to effect such decision.

The plaint sets out that under Section 34 of the Agreement any controversial subject matter be directed to an arbitrator.

The plaintiffs further state that until the decision of the arbitrator is filed the respondent Council be barred from taking any action as per the decision of 28.09.2006 by the Council.In the meantime the Plaintiff had applied for an ex-parte trial as the respondents had not submitted to court seeking a date to file answer in the present case. In these circumstances the plaintiffs submitted to court that they are entitled to an ex-parte judgment.

Attorney-at-Law Lionel Ekanayake appearing for the respondents, the KMC submitted to court that no notices had been served on them on the application made by the plaintiffs for an ex-parte judgment.

Attorney-at-Law who appeared at that date for the plaintiff company submitted to court that the respondents are barred from seeking a date for objections under Section 84 of the Civil Procedure Code. The Judge in his order on that date had directed the plaintiff and the defendants to file submissions after which an order would be made on the application by the plaintiff company.

Attorney-at-Law Romesh Karaliyadde appeared for the respondents.

Atorneys-at-Law Wasantha Perera with M. Zavahir and Ajith Dharmaprema appeared for the plaintiffs.