Sirisena v. Mutukumarana and Others – sllr 2002 volume 2 page 253

In the case between Sirisena (plaintiff-respondent) and the 2nd defendant-appellant, the court addressed the issue of whether the plaintiff-respondent’s statutory right to eject the tenant and subtenant under the Rent Act was extinguished through condonation or waiver, based on the plaintiff-respondent’s knowledge of the subletting and subsequent acceptance of rent. It was held that continued acceptance of rent by the landlord, despite knowledge of subletting, constituted condonation, thereby precluding the exercise of the right to eject. The decision reaffirmed the principle that active or passive acceptance of rent amounts to waiver or condonation of the breach, relying on established precedents such as Robert v. Rashad and related authorities. Emphasis was placed on the impact that cond