IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE DEMOCRATIC SOCIALIST REPUBLIC OF SRI LANKA In the matter of an Appeal in terms of Article 127(2) of the Constitution of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka and Section 5(C) of the High Court of the Provinces (Special Provisions)

(Amendment) Act No. 54 of 2006 Abekoon Mudiyanselage Seelawathie Kumarihamy of Yapa Niwasa, Millawana, SC Appeal No: 141/2012 Matale.

SC. HCCA.LA No. 168/2011. Through her Power of Attorney CP/HCCA/Kandy/125/2008(F). Holder Yapa Mudiyanselage D.C. Matale No. 5463/L Chandana Yapa Bandara of Yapa Niwasa, Millawana, Matale.

PLAINTIFF -VS-

Galakumburegedara Wijerathna of Madagama, Millawana, Matale.

DEFENDANT AND BETWEEN Abekoon Mudiyanselage Seelawathie Kumarihamy of Yapa Niwasa, Millawana, Matale.

Through her Power of Attorney Holder Yapa Mudiyanselage Chandana Yapa Bandara of Yapa Niwasa, Millawana, Matale.

PLAINTIFF -APPELLANT -VS-

Galakumburegedara Wijerathna of Madagama, Millawana, Matale.

DEFENDANT -RESPONDENT AND NOW BETWEEN Abekoon Mudiyanselage Seelawathie Kumarihamy of Yapa Niwasa, Millawana, Matale.

Through her Power of Attorney Holder Yapa Mudiyanselage Chandana Yapa Bandara of Yapa Niwasa, Millawana, Matale.

PLAINTIFF -APPELLANT-

APPELLANT -VS-

Galakumburegedara Wijerathna of Madagama, Millawana, Matale.

DEFENDANT -RESPONDENT-

RESPONDENT BEFORE : JAYANTHA JAYASURIYA, PC, CJ.

S. THURAIRAJA, PC, J.

YASANTHA KODAGODA, PC, J.

COUNSEL : Rohan Sahabandu, PC with Nathasha Fernando for the Plaintiff-

Appellant-Appellant.

Amarasiri Panditharatne with Thushani Machado and Laknath Pieris for the Defendant-Respondent-Respondent.

ARGUED ON: 09^th March 2022.

WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS: Plaintiff- Appellant -Appellant on 2^nd September 2019 and

30^th March 2022.

Defendant- Respondent- Respondent on 22^nd of July 2019 and 27^th April 2022.

DECIDED ON: 29^th February 2024 S. THURAIRAJA, PC, J.

The Background of the Case The Plaintiff-Appellant-Appellant, Abekoon Mudiyanselage Seelawathie Kumarihamy, (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Plaintiff’ or ‘Appellant’, as appropriate) instituted action in the District Court of Matale by Plaint dated 30.06.2000 seeking to vindicate her title against the Defendant-Respondent-Respondent, Galakumburegedara Wijerathna (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Defendant’ or ‘Respondent’, as appropriate) to a land called “Alawatta” aliases “Alawattehena” and “Medalanda” (in extent of A1-R1-P16), described in the schedule to the Plaint, for the ejectment of the Defendant-

Respondent-Respondent and for damages.

The Plaintiff-Appellant-Appellant stated by her Plaint that she became the owner of the disputed corpus by Deed of Transfer bearing No. 73 dated 25.06.1996 attested by C. S. Wijeyratne Notary Public and her husband Yapa Mudiyanselage Agrapala was the transferor.

In establishing this position, the Plaintiff-Appellant-Appellant traced her title and pleaded that the land originally belonged to the State. She stated that in terms of the Land Settlement Ordinance, it was settled to one Jayawardena on 25.10.1941 and that the said Jayawardena came into possession of the land described in the Schedule to the Plaint. The corpus was shown as Lot 918 in the Surveyor General’s Final Village Plan (FVP) No. 72, showing an extent of A1-R1-P16. It was the position of the Plaintiff- Appellant-Appellant that the said Jayawardena possessed the land in question and by Deed No.12703 dated 18.01.1946, he transferred same to Loku Manike. Subsequently, Loku Manike had transferred the corpus to the Plaintiff’s Husband, Agrapala, by Deed No.1030 dated 24.7.1974. The Plaintiff-Appellant-Appellant stated that the said Agrapala then sold it to the Plaintiff-Appellant-Appellant by Deed of Transfer No.73 dated 25.7.1996 as stated above.

It was the position of the Plaintiff-Appellant-Appellant that she was in possession of the land in question and the Defendant-Respondent-Respondent had come to occupy the land as a servant of her Husband. She states that after she became the owner of the land, the Defendant-Respond