IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE DEMOCRATIC SOCIALIST REPUBLIC OF SRI LANKA Wickramage Don Subadra, No. 234/E, Mulleriyawa North, Angoda.

Petitioner SC FR NO: SC/FR/247/2016 Vs.

1. Kotikawatte Mulleriyawa Pradeshiya Sabhawa, Head Office, Gothatuwa New Town.

2. Kumuduni Gunathilleka, Secretary, Kotikawatte Mulleriyawa Pradeshiya Sabhawa, Head Office, Gothatuwa New Town.

2A. Chandani Ekanayake, Secretary, Kotikawatte Mulleriyawa Pradeshiya Sabhawa, Head Office, Gothatuwa New Town.

3. Prasanna Solangarachchi, Solanga Drive, Himbutana, Angoda.

4. Polwattege Arosha Asantha Perera, No. 228/A, Mulleriyawa North, Angoda.

5. Sri Lanka Land Reclamation and Development Corporation, No. 3, Jayawardenapura Mawatha, Sri Jayawardenapura Kotte.

6. Urban Development Authority, 7th Floor, Sethsiripaya, Battaramulla.

7. Hon. Attorney General, Attorney General’s Department, Colombo 12. Respondents Before: Hon. Justice Vijith K. Malalgoda, P.C.

Hon. Justice Mahinda Samayawardhena Hon. Justice Arjuna Obeyesekere Counsel: Shantha Jayawardena with Thilini Vidanagamage for the Petitioner.

Migara Kodithuwakku for the 1st and 2A Respondents. Yuresha de Silva, D.S.G. for the 5th – 7th Respondents.

Written Submissions:

By the Petitioner on 03.02.2021 and 08.07.2024 By the 1st – 2nd Respondents on 29.07.2021 and 25.06.2024 By the 5th – 7th Respondents on 12.01.2021 Argued on: 12.06.2024 Decided on: 05.08.2024 Samayawardhena, J.

Introduction The petitioner filed this application in this Court against (1) the Kotikawatte-Mulleriyawa Pradeshieya Sabhawa, (2) its Secretary, (3) its former Chairman, (4) a person by the name of P.A.A. Perera, (5) the Sri Lanka Land Reclamation and Development Corporation, (6) the Urban Development Authority and (7) the Attorney General, seeking a declaration that her fundamental rights guaranteed by Article 12(1) of the Constitution was infringed by the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 5th and 6th respondents by the arbitrary demolition of the northern boundary wall of the petitioner’s land, and compensation.

Although the Sri Lanka Land Reclamation and Development Corporation and the Urban Development Authority were made as parties, the petitioner primarily based her case on the claim that the Kotikawatte- Mulleriyawa Pradeshiya Sabha, utilizing its own bulldozer and operated by its employee, demolished her northern boundary wall on 02.07.2016. Duty of uberrima fides, suppression and misrepresentation of material facts In the petition and corresponding affidavit of the petitioner dated 26.07.2016, the petitioner’s position was that the said boundary wall was constructed with the approval of the Pradeshiya Sabha. The petitioner gave prominence to this in her petition, the corresponding affidavit, and the written submissions filed prior to the argument. In paragraph 8 of her affidavit the petitioner stated that “The said approval seal placed on the building plan [marked P4] gave approval for a mixed purpose building, security installations and boundary walls.” (emphasis by the petitioner) In paragraph 9 she further stated that “after completing the construction of my house, including the boundary walls, the then Chairman of the 1st respondent issued Certificate of Conformity” marked P5.

According to the side minute under the journal entry dated 04.08.2016, notices of this application had been issued on 05.08.2016. The application was supported and leave to proceed was granted on

10.08.2016 in the absence of the Pradeshiya Sabha.

The position of the Pradeshiya Sabha is that the said boundary wall was an unauthorized construction built without any approval from the Pradeshiya Sabha. I am inclined to accept this position. The petitioner relies solely on the seal placed on the building plan marked P4 by the Pradeshiya Sabha to present a distorted case that the boundary wall was constructed with the approval of the Pradeshiya Sabha, and that following its construction, the Pradeshiya Sabha issued the Certificate of Conformity. P4 contains only the building plan and nothing e