Wickremaratne v. Thavendrarajah – sllr 1982 volume 1 page 021

In Wickremaratne v. Thavendrarajah, the court addressed whether Section 92 of the Evidence Ordinance bars admission of oral evidence aimed at proving that a written lease document (P4) did not express the true agreement, but was instead a sham to conceal the underlying transaction. It was held that oral evidence was admissible to show that P4 did not represent the real intention of the parties, reaffirming the principle that statutory provisions do not preclude evidence establishing that a document was not intended to operate as an actual contract. Reliance was placed on Sections 91 and 92 of the Evidence Ordinance and leading judicial authorities, underscoring the ability of courts to look beyond a written document when the existence of a genuine agreement is in question.

Atukorale J. —