Wickramaratne v. Thavendrarajah – sllr 1982 volume 2 page 479

In the case between Wickramaratne (landlord, appellant) and Thavendrrajah (tenant, respondent), the court addressed whether a purported lease agreement for the Modern Drapery Stores was a sham devised to circumvent the Rent Restriction Act, and whether parol evidence could be admitted to demonstrate that the written lease did not reflect the true contract between the parties. The findings established that the lease document (P4) was a facade, crafted to defeat the operation of restrictive statutory provisions. As the transaction was determined to be illegal, recovery of excess rent paid was held to be unenforceable at law. The decision emphasized that parol evidence was admissible to show the real nature of a transaction designed to evade statutory provisions, and that no party may claim r