Muthukumarana v Sirisena and Another – sllr 2004 volume 3 page 393

In the case between the plaintiff (the owner’s daughter and successor landlord) and the 1st and 2nd defendants (the original tenant and the alleged subtenant), the court addressed the issue of whether statutory tenant protection under the Rent Act applies after the expiration of a lease and if a subtenant may independently resist ejectment. The court held that statutory tenant protection is available only to the contractual tenant and does not extend to occupants or subtenants lacking privity of contract, reaffirming the principle that a subtenant cannot assert rights beyond those of the contractual tenant. The decision relied on principles of common law and the Rent Act, emphasizing that, upon cessation of a contractual tenancy and grant of decree against the tenant, a subtenant without i