Sobhitha Rajakaruna J.

The Plaintiff- Respondent-Respondent (‘Plaintiff’) filed the Partition Action No. P/273 in the District Court of Badulla against the Defendants-Respondents-Respondents (‘Defendants’), including the 2^nd Defendant- Petitioner-Appellant (‘2^nd Defendant’). The Plaintiff's late father had filed a Partition Action bearing No. P/9298 (‘1^st Partition case’) previously in the District Court of Badulla and sought to partition the same land, which is the corpus of the 2^nd Partition case bearing No. P/273 (‘2^nd Partition case’). The 1^st Partition case (‘P/9298’) was dismissed by the District Court on the basis that the pedigree had not been proved and the corpus had not been identified. Upon an Appeal lodged against the said Judgement, the Court of Appeal affirmed the said Judgement of the District Court.

The Plaintiff instituted the 2^nd Partition case (‘No. P/273’) in the same District Court only after the said dismissal of the 1^st Partition case. In the said case, the District Court initially considered the matter based on the principle of res judicata, and the primary question was as follows: “Can the Plaintiff maintain the action on the principle of res judicata in vie