SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

FRANCIS SAMARAWICKREMA – Appellant
Versus
HILDA JAYASINGHE AND ANOTHER – Respondent


New Page 1

FRANCIS SAMARAWICKREMA
VS
HILDA JAYASINGHE AND ANOTHER

SUPREME COURT
SARATH N. SILVA, C. J.
SHIRANEE TILAKAWARDANE, J. AND
SALEEM MARSOOF.
S. C. APPEAL NO.7 /2004
S. C. SPECIAL L. A. NO. 111/2003
C. A. NO. 388/93(F)
D. C. KALUTARA NO. 2443/L
OCTOBER 24TH, 2006,
JUNE 21ST 2006,
JULY 4TH 2006,
SEPTEMBER 21ST 2006
MARCH 15TH 2007

Prevention of Frauds Ordinance - Section 2 - Any contract for the sale or other disposition of land or any interest in the land is invalid unless in writing and signed in the presence of a Notary Public and two or more witnesses - Evidence Ordinance - Section 68 - proof of execution of document required to be attested - Section 33, Section 101, Section 102, Section 103 - Evidence in a former judicial proceedings when relevant - Section 3 - Definition of proved and disproved - Standard of proof - Criminal and Civil.

The plaintiff-respondent-appellant filed this action in the District Court of Kalutara on 24th November 1976 against the 1st and 2nd defendant-appellants- respondents. The case first went to trial on 1st March 1978, and after trial the District Judge pronounced the judgment for the appellant as prayed for in the plaint



























































































































































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top