SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(SRI)(SC) 9910

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE DEMOCRATIC SOCIALIST REPUBLIC OF SRI LANKA S.C. Appeal 43/2016 1. Hewa Dewage Josalin.

S.C. Leave to Appeal Application

2. Suduwa Dewage Jamis Somadasa No. SC (HC) CALA 312/2010 alias Somadasa Gamage both of High Court Case No.

Pahala Karagahamuna, WP/HCCA/GPH/20/2003 Kadawatha.

Final PLAINTIFFS D.C. Gampaha Case No. 25792/L - VS -

1. Nawalage Winson Cooray, No. 279/2/A, Pahala Karagahamuna, Kadawatha.

2. Nawalage Mallika Cooray, No. 369, Neligama, Ragama.

3. Somadasa Silva, No. 276/1, Pahala Karagahamuna, Kadawatha.

4. K. K. Seelawathie, No. 276/2, Pahala Karagahamuna, Kadawatha.

5. Mervin Mendis, No. 276/2/B, Pahala Karagahamuna, Kadawatha.

6. D.A. Hewage, No. 276, Pahala Karagahamuna, Kadawatha.

7. G. A. Evgin Perera, No. 276/1, Pahala Karagahamuna, Kadawatha.

8. Nawalage Pabilis Cooray, No. 308, Neligama, Ragama.

(N.E. Cooray)

DEFENDANTS AND

1. Nawalage Winson Cooray, No. 279/2/A, Pahala Karagahamuna, Kadawatha.

2. Nawalage Mallika Cooray, No. 369, Neligama, Ragama.

3. Somadasa Silva, No. 276/1, Pahala Karagahamuna, Kadawatha.

4. K. K. Seelawathie, No. 276/2, Pahala Karagahamuna, Kadawatha.

5. Mervin Mendis, No. 276/2/B, Pahala Karagahamuna, Kadawatha.

6. D.A. Hewage, No. 276, Pahala Karagahamuna, Kadawatha.

7. G. A. Evgin Perera, No. 276/1, Pahala Karagahamuna, Kadawatha.

8. Nawalage Pabilis Cooray, No. 308, Neligama, Ragama.

DEFENDANT – APPELLANTS - VS -

1. Hewa Dewage Josalin.

2. Suduwa Dewage Jamis Somadasa alias Somadasa Gamage both of Pahala Karagahamuna, Kadawatha.

PLAINTIFF – RESPONDENTS AND NOW BETWEEN - VS –

1. Hewa Dewage Josalin. (died)

2. Suduwa Dewage Jamis Somadasa alias Somadasa Gamage (died)

2a Kalanchige Sisilin

2b Sudu Dewage Shiroma Nishanthi Gamage

2c Sudu Dewage Anoma Nilmini Gamage

2d Sudu Dewage Champika Neel Gamage

2e Sudu Dewage Anushka Shayamali Gamage All of No.275, Pahala Karagahamuna, Kadawatha.

SUBSTITUTED PLAINTIFF-

RESPONDENT-

APPELLANTS -VS-

1. Nawalage Winson Cooray, 1a Nawalage Sunil Cooray

1b Nawalage Sarath Coorey No.279/2/A, Pahala Karagahamuna, Kadawatha.

2. Nawalage Mallika Cooray, No. 369, Neligama, Ragama.

3. Somadasa Silva, No. 276/1, Pahala Karagahamuna, Kadawatha.

4. K. K. Seelawathie, No. 276/2, Pahala Karagahamuna, Kadawatha.

5. Mervin Mendis, No. 276/2/B, Pahala Karagahamuna, Kadawatha.

6. D.A. Hewage, No. 276, Pahala Karagahamuna, Kadawatha.

7. G.A. Evgin Perera, No. 276/1, Pahala Karagahamuna, Kadawatha.

8. Nawalage Pabilis Cooray, 8a Nawalage Thamara Coorey No. 308, Neligama, Ragama.

DEFENDANT – APPELLANT – RESPONDENTS Before : E. A. G. R. Amarasekara, J.

Kumudini Wickremasinghe, J.

Achala Wengappuli, J.

Counsel : Chandana Liyanapatabendy, P.C instructed by Shamika Senevirathna for the Plaintiff – Respondent – Appellants.

W. Dayaratne, P.C with Ms. R. Jayawardena for the Defendant –

Appellant – Respondents.

Argued on : 17.06.2022 Delivered on : 23.05.2025 E A G R Amarasekara, J.

Original 1st Plaintiff was the mother of the 2nd Plaintiff who had conveyed the subject matter of the Plaint to the 2nd Plaintiff subject to her life interest and after their demise 2a to 2e substituted Plaintiff-Respondent-Appellants were substituted in their place. This is an appeal filed by the original Plaintiff – Respondent – Appellants against the Judgement of the Civil Appellate High Court of the Western Province at Gampaha delivered in Case No. WP/HCCA/GPH/20/2003 (Final) dated 26.03.2010 allowing the appeal of the Defendant – Appellant – Respondents by which the said Civil Appellate High Court held in favour of the Defendant – Appellant - Respondents and set aside the Judgement of the District Court of Gampaha dated 21.03.2003.

The original Plaintiffs “(hereinafter the “Plaintiffs) instituted this action on or around 06.07.1983 against the 1st to 8th Defendants (hereinafter the “Defendants”) seeking a declaration that the said Defendants have no right of servitude over their land which was morefully described in the schedule to the Plaint and a permanent injunction restraining the Defendants from entering the sai

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top