Court of Appeal dismisses petition against eviction of a company from Lotus Tower

By Lakmal Sooriyagoda

A writ petition filed challenging Colombo Lotus Tower Management Company’s decision to evict N. Seelanatha Holdings from the Lotus Tower premises was yesterday dismissed by the Court of Appeal.  

Court of Appeal two-judge-bench comprising Justice (Acting President) M.T. Mohammed Laffar and Justice K.M.S. Dissanayake upheld the preliminary objection raised by the Colombo Lotus Tower Management Company (Private) Limited and decided to dismiss the petition in-limine. Petitioner, N. Seelanatha Holdings (Private) Limited had filed this writ petition seeking an order quashing the decision of the first Respondent (Lotus Tower Management Company) to evict the Petitioner from the premises (Ground Floor Commercial Space 01 at the Colombo Lotus Tower).  

The petitioner had cited Colombo Lotus Tower Management Company (Private) Limited and the Telecommunications Regulatory Commission of Sri Lanka as respondents.  

The first respondent raised preliminary objections challenging the maintainability of the application based on the following grounds; the relationship between the Petitioner and the 1st Respondent is purely contractual, the Petitioner could have sought specific performance for their purported grievance, the Petitioner could have sought damages for their purported grievance and the grievance of the Petitioner does not amount to a violation of natural justice. The Court of Appeal held that this application was not entitled to succeed both in fact and law. Therefore, the court decided to dismiss the application with costs payable by the Petitioner to the 1st Respondent only, upholding all the preliminary legal objections raised by the Counsel for the 1st Respondent as to the maintainability of the application. The Court further ordered to vacate and set aside all the interim reliefs earlier granted by the Court to the Petitioner.  

Ali Sabry, PC with Naamiq Nafath and Vimukthi Karunarathne appeared for the Petitioner. Counsel Janaprith Fernando with Amila Perera, Zam Zam Ismail and Lakshika Mahindasinghe instructed by K. U. Gunasekara appeared for the first respondent. Additional Solicitor General Sumathi Dharmawardhena, PC appeared for the second respondent.