Kularatne and Another v. Rajapakse – sllr 1985 volume 1 page 024

In the case between the petitioner (the unsuccessful candidate contesting the election result) and the respondents (1st respondent — the returned candidate, Rajapakse; 2nd respondent — the agent who made the contested statement), the primary legal issue was whether a false statement regarding the petitioner’s alleged ingratitude, made by the 2nd respondent, constituted a corrupt practice under section 58(1)(d) of the Ceylon (Parliamentary Elections) Order-in-Council. The Supreme Court examined the scope of its appellate jurisdiction, noting its limitation to questions of law rather than factual determinations. It was held that the appellate review did not reveal any legal error in the Election Judge’s findings that the 2nd respondent acted as the agent of the 1st respondent and had made