BALASURIYA AND ANOTHER

VS.

RAMANAYAKE AND OTHERS

SUPREME COURT
FERNANDO, J.
GOONERATNE, J.
OBEYESEKERE, J.
SC/APPEAL/181/2014
SC/SPL/LA/295/2013
CA/APPEAL/109/2000 (F)
DC RATNAPURA 6199/P
JUNE 20, 2021

Kandyan Marriage and Divorce Act, No. 44 of 1952, sections 3(1), 3(2), 23(1)(a) (ii), 23(3), 28(1), 66-Marriage Registration Ordinance, No. 19 of 1907-Nature of marriage not specified-Presumption of "diga" marriage-Kandyan Law (Declaration and Amendment) Ordinance, section 9(1)-Ordinance No. 3 of 1870, section 39-Best evidence rule

The 1st plaintiff is the daughter of ST who predeceased her father. The father who owned the land in suit died intestate. Upon his death, the 1st plaintiff filed a partition action on the basis that she was entitled to an undivided 1/4 share of the corpus, which the defendants disputed stating inter alia that ST married in diga during the lifetime of her father and forfeited her rights to paternal inheritance. The District Court held with the 1st plaintiff but on appeal the Court of Appeal reversed that finding. The 1st plaintiff appealed to the Supreme Court.

Held :

1. In terms of section 28(1) of the Kandyan Mar