Court of Appeal issues charge sheet and summons against two Directors of Jayasinghe Furniture Dealer

On or around 24 November 2016, the Court of Appeal of Sri Lanka issued Charge Sheets and Summons against two directors of a renowned furniture company in Kandy; Jayasinghe Furniture Dealers Ltd.

Jayasinghe Furniture Dealers Ltd. complained to court by way of petition on the basis that two Directors of the company who had been the former Chairman and Managing Director of the Company had been acting in contravention to orders granted by the Commercial High Court of Colombo. Jayasinghe Furniture Dealers Ltd. is a family-owned business which started trading in 1949 and has now expanded into a company owning four showrooms in Kandy and a factory in Kandy having a net asset value of over Rs. 300,000,000.

This action was instituted by Jayasinghe Furniture Dealers Ltd. and its application to court was supported by Counsel Nishan Premathiratne and Janith Fernando, Attorneys-at-Law who appeared on the instructions of Attorney-at-Law Sanjay Fonseka.

It was submitted to his Lordships of the Court of Appeal through the Petition and supporti   ng documents that the two directors of the Petitioner, Ariyapala Jayasinghe and Bertie Jayasinghe who had been the former Chairman and Managing Director of the Petitioner company respectively had managed the Petitioner company to its detriment. Furthermore, it was submitted that the Petitioner by Petition dated 18 December 2015 sought to restrain the former Chairman and Managing Director of the Petitioner company under Section 233 of the Companies Act No. 7 of 2007 in for interfering with the duties and functions entrusted with the present Managing Director of the Petitioner company.

It was submitted further that, on or around 22 December 2015, the Commercial High Court granted interim orders restraining the two Directors from interfering with the duties and functions of the present Managing Director of the Petitioner company and thereafter pursuant thereto on or around 28 June 2016 granted permanent restraining orders against the two Directors.

It was submitted through the Petition and supporting documents that even pursuant to the permanent restraining orders granted by the Commercial High Court, the two Directors continued to interfere with the duties and functions of the present Managing Director of the company.

It was submitted that even pursuant to several requests made by the Petitioner, the two Directors deliberately failed to handover vital documents and company-owned vehicles of the Petitioner which were illegally retained by the two Directors. 

Counsel for the Petitioner also made submissions to Court on the jurisdiction of the Court of Appeal to hear and determine violations against the orders made by the Commercial High Court and the power of the Court of Appeal to punish perpetrators in such instance. 

His Lordships of the Court of Appeal, being satisfied with the submissions of the Counsel for the Petitioner, issued summons requiring the two defendants to answer to the offences of Contempt of Court against the violations of the orders of the Commercial High Court on the 10 January 2017.