IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE DEMOCRATIC SOCIALIST REPUBLIC OF SRI LANKA In the matter of an application under Articles 127 and 128 of the Constitution read with section 5(c) of the High Court of the Provinces (Special Provisions) Act No. 19 of 1990 as amended by Act No. 54 of 2006, for Leave to Appeal against the judgment dated 24/07/2017 of the Civil Appellate High Court of the Southern Province holden in Tangalle in case No. WP/HCCA/ 04/2016 Dayaratne Jayasuriya, SC Appeal 27/2018 Debarawewa, S.C.(HC) CALA No.404/17 Tissamaharamaya SP/HCCA/TA/RA/04/2016 DC Hambanthota Case No.281/P Plaintiff Vs.

1. Warusha Hennadige Heen Nona (deceased)

1A. Indralatha Irene Jayasuriya Both of Debarawewa, Tissamaharamaya

2. Gamini Jayasruiya (deceased)

Debarawewa, Tissamaharamaya

2A. Lekam Mudiyanselage Chandrawathi

3. Premalatha Jayasuriya

4. Indralatha Irene Jayasuriya

5. Chandraseeli Jayasuriya All of Debarawewa, Tissamaharamaya

6. A.H. Misinona (Deceased)

“Paradise Cafe”

Debarawewa, Tissamaharamaya

6A. Dayananda Jayasuriya, Debarawewa, Tissamaharamaya

7. Dayananda Jayasuriya, Debarawewa, Tissamaharamaya Defendants AND BETWEEN Buddhika Wickramasuriya, Coranel’s Land, Debarawewa, Tissamaharamaya Petitioner Vs.

Premalatha Jayasuriya, Debarawewa, Tissamaharamaya

3^rd Defendant/Respondent AND BETWEEN Premalatha Jayasuriya, Debarawewa, Tissamaharamaya

3^rd Defendant/ Respondent/ Petitioner Vs.

Buddhika Wickramasuriya, Coranel’s Land, Debarawewa, Tissamaharamaya Petitioner/Respondent AND NOW BETWEEN Premalatha Jayasuriya, Debarawewa, Tissamaharamaya

3^rd Defendant/ Respondent/ Petitioner/

Appellant Vs.

Buddhika Wickramasuriya, Coranel’s Land, Debarawewa, Tissamaharamaya Petitioner/Respondent/Respondent Before: B.P. Aluwihare PC, J Priyantha Jayawardena PC, J V. K. Malalgoda PC, J Counsel: W. Dayaratne, PC with Ms. R. Jayawardena for the 3^rd defendant- respondent-

petitioner- appellant Sanath Vidanapathirana with Shihan Ananda and Amith Weerasekara for the petitioner- respondent- respondent. Argued on: 12^th December, 2019 Decided on: 9^th August, 2023 Priyantha Jayawardena PC, J Facts of the case This appeal is in respect of the judgment of the Provincial High Court of the Southern Province dated 24^th of July, 2017 (exercising civil appellate jurisdiction) (hereinafter referred to as the “High Court”), where it was held that after the final decree is entered in a partition action, a person who had derived a contingent interest to the corpus of a partition action is entitled in law to execute a writ to obtain possession of his entitlement under the Partition Law, No.21 of 1977, as amended, (hereinafter referred to as the “Partition Law”), notwithstanding the fact that he is not a party to the original partition action.

The plaintiff instituted a partition action in the District Court of Hambantota (hereinafter referred to as the “District Court”) to partition the land described in the schedule to the plaint. Thereafter, in terms of the provisions of the Partition Law, a commission was issued by the District Court. Accordingly, a preliminary survey was carried out by a Surveyor and the commission was returned with the Preliminary Plan and the Surveyor’s report to the court.

Thereafter, the case proceeded to trial without a contest. At the conclusion of the trial, the learned District Judge delivered the judgment and held that the plaintiff and the 2^nd to 5^th defendants were entitled to 1/5^th share of the corpus to the partition action. Later, an interlocutory decree was entered. Therefore, a commission was issued by the District Court for the preparation of the final plan dividing the corpus of the partition action into lots according to the entitlement of shares of the said parties. The Surveyor had returned the commission to court with the ‘Final Plan No.1805’ dated 5^th of April, 1995 and the surveyor’s report dated 23^rd of April, 1995.

Pending the final decree of the partition action, the 3^rd defendant-respondent-petitioner-appellant (hereinafter referred to as the “appell