Dassanayake v. Eastern Produce and Estates Co., Ltd. – sllr 1986 volume 1 page 258

In the case between the plaintiff-respondent, a Limited Liability Company owning the Rothschild Estate, Pussellawa, and the defendant-appellant, the former superintendent of the Rothschild Estate, the court addressed the issue of whether the defendant-appellant’s retention of an official motor car after termination of employment was lawful in light of subsequent statutory amendments. The holding determined that, under the amendments to the Land Reform Law—specifically section 42B(5)(a)—the right to sue for the recovery or compensation of the motor car had vested exclusively in the Land Reform Commission following the compulsory acquisition of the estate and its assets. The action brought by the Limited Liability Company was therefore not maintainable, as the proper party to advance such a