IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE DEMOCRATIC SOCIALIST REPUBLIC OF SRI LANKA Kose Mohamed Sulaiha Umma of Udanga, Summanthurai PLAINTIFF Vs

1. Ahamed Lebbe Assanar

2. Aliyar Thangamma

3. Mahulapillai Yseenbawa All of Udanga, Sammanthurai SC/APPEAL/174/2011 SC/HCCA/LA/57/10 DEFENDANTS DC Kalmunai Case No.2298/L AND HC (Civil) Kalmunai Case No.EP/HCCA/Kal/147/08

1. Ahamed Lebbe Assanar

2. Aliyar Thangamma

3. Mahulapillai Yseenbawa All of Udanga, Sammanthurai DEFENDANTS-APPELLANTS Vs Kose Mohamed Sulaiha Umma of Udanga, Summanthurai PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT AND NOW In the matter of an application for Leave to Appeal in terms of section 5(C)(1) of the High Court of the Provinces (Special Provisions) (Amendment) Act No. 54 of 2006 read together with Article 127 of the Constitution.

1. Ahamed Lebbe Assanar

2. Aliyar Thangamma All of Udanga, Sammanthurai Defendants-Appellants-Appellants Kose Mohamed Sulaiha Umma of Udanga, Summanthurai Plaintiff-Respondent-Respondent Before : B. P. Aluwihare PC, J.

Priyantha Jayawardena PC, J.

Vijith K. Malalgoda PC, J Counsel : V. Puvitharan PC with R. A. Vishanthanie, Anuya Rasanayakam for the 1st and 2^nd Defendents- Appellants M. Nizam Kariyaper PC with M.C.M Nausas and M.I.M Iynullah for the Plaintiff-Respondent-Respondent Argued on : 1^st February, 2018 Decided on : 4^th October, 2023 Priyantha Jayawardena PC, J Facts The defendants-appellants-appellants (hereinafter referred to as “the defendants”) filed the instant appeal against the judgment of the Civil Appellate High Court of Kalmunai which dismissed the appeal filed by them against the judgment of the District Court of Kalmunai, dated 24^th of April, 2002 where it was held that the learned judge of the District Court is entitled to frame an additional issue (new issue) during the course of the judgment in terms of section 149 of the Civil Procedure Code, as amended (hereinafter referred to as the “Code”).

The plaintiff-respondent-respondent (hereinafter referred to as “the plaintiff”) instituted action against the defendants in District Court of Kalmunai on the 29^th of April, 1999 and pleaded inter-alia that by virtue of the Permit No. AM/SP/282 dated 8^th of May, 1979 issued by the Government Agent of Ampara, she became entitled to possess and occupy the land in terms of section 19(2) of the Land Development Ordinance.

Further, it was pleaded that she and her predecessors in title were in undisturbed and uninterrupted possession of the said land. However, the defendants disturbed the possession by breaking the boundary fence constructed by her.

Moreover, it was stated that when she made an attempt to repair the boundary fence by fixing new poles, the defendants not only fought with her but also made a complaint to the Sammanthurai Police. After the said complaint an inquiry was held on the 22^nd of March, 1999 by the Divisional Secretary. However, no action was taken by him.

The plaintiff further stated that when the defendants again made an attempt to disturb the possession of the land, her son prevented the defendants from disturbing the possession of the property. Thereafter, the defendants made a false complaint to the Police. Subsequently, the son was arrested by Sammanhurai Police and he was remanded. She stated that the Police were helping the defendants to possess the land illegally and to fence it. Furthermore, the defendants influenced the Divisional Secretary and other State Officials preventing them from taking action against them and taking steps to enter, possess and develop the land and to deprive the plaintiff's entitlement to the land.

In the circumstances, the plaintiff stated that she instituted action in the District Court of Kalmunai and prayed inter alia to;

a) declare that the plaintiff is entitled to be possessed and occupy in the land more fully described schedule to the plaint, and b) grant an enjoining order or interim injunction until the until the case is concluded preventing the Defendants from disturbing the possession and from doing any