2023 Supreme(SRI)(SC) 20717
| S I I B I IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE DEMOCRATIC SOCIALIST REPUBLIC OF SRI LANKA n the matter of an application for leave to appeal under section 5 C of the High Court of the Provinces (Special Provisions) Act No.54 of 2006. llandari Devage Jayathilake, Ginihigama South, Pepiliyawala. Plaintiff C/APPEAL 131/2011 SC/HC/CA/LA/438/2010 WP/HCCA/AV/858/2008(F) District Court of Pugoda Case No.331/L Vs. 1. Illandari Devage Karunawathie, 2. Batepolage Dayaratne, oth of No.205/2, Ginihigama South, Pepiliyawala Defendants AND BETWEEN llandari Devage Jayathilake, Ginihigama South, Pepiliyawala. Plaintiff-Appellant 1. Illandari Devage Karunawathie, 2. Batepolage Dayaratne, 1 |
| B I Both of No.205/2, Ginihigama South, Pepiliyawala Defendants-Respondents AND NOW BETWEEN llandari Devage Jayathilake, Ginihigama South, Pepiliyawala. Plaintiff-Appellant-Petitioner 1. Illandari Devage Karunawathie, 2. Batepolage Dayaratne, Both of No.205/2, Ginihigama South, Pepiliyawala Defendants-Respondents-Respondents efore : Vijith K. Malalgoda, PC. J Mahinda Samayawardhena, J K. Priyantha Fernando, J Counsel : Manohara de Silva, PC with Ms. Sasiri Chandrasiri for the Plaintiff-Appellant-Petitioner. Niranjan de Silva with Sanjay Thambiah for the Defendants- Respondents-Respondents. Argued On : 19.06.2023 2 |
| W D K 1 ritten Submissions : 16.12.2011 on behalf of the Petitioner. Tendered On 03.02.2012 on behalf of the Respondents. 02.08.2023 on behalf of the Respondents. ecided On : 10.10.2023 . PRIYANTHA FERNANDO, J . The Plaintiff-Appellant-Petitioner (hereinafter referred to as the appellant) in this case, preferred an appeal from the judgment of the learned High Court Judge of Avissawella dated 18.11.2010 which was given in favour of the Defendants-Respondents-Respondents (hereinafter referred to as the respondents). The appellant alleges that, he is the owner of the land to which the dispute relates to, and that the respondents should not be given a right of way by way of a servitude over the appellant’s land. 2. This Court granted leave to appeal on the questions of law stated in (b),(d),(f) and (g) in averment No.11 of the petition dated 28.12.2009. The facts in brief. 3. The appellant became the owner of the land described in the schedule to the plaint by deed No. 17714 dated 08.11.1987 attested by P.M. Srimathie Suriapperuma, Notary Public. The appellant has bought the said land from one Thilakarathne the appellant, the appellant and his in 1987. As per predecessors in title has had over 10 years of uninterrupted and undisturbed possession of the said land, and has also had prescriptive title to the same and further, there has been no servitudes over the said land. According to the Survey Plan No. 28/L, in District Court Case No. 33004/L drawn by surveyor Mayadunne, the land to which the dispute relates to is seven perches in extent. 3 |
| 4. The land which belongs to the appellant is situated facing the Pepiliyawala-Dangalla Road. The land belonging to the respondents in this case has been situated behind the land of the appellant, adjacent to the appellants’ land towards the north-west. The respondents’ land is far larger in extent than that of the appellant. 5. In March 1989, the appellant has started constructing a boutique in his land. Following this, a dispute has arise |
Back
