KAPURUHAMY v. HENDRICK et al.

KAPURUHAMY v. HENDRICK et al.

C, R., Kurunegala, 2,954.

 

Possession of undivided shares of land by taking produce of trees on divided portion of land-Verbal arrangement-Admissibility of evidence of enjoyment of specific trees to support title to undivided share- Onus probandi.

It is competent to owners of undivided shares of land, to make arrangements among themselves as to the enjoyment of the produce of their land.

The owner of an undivided share of a land may, in support of his claim to such share, call evidence to show that he had taken the produce of a certain number of trees in the garden.

Where the defendant in a case pleads title by prescription to the land in dispute, the plaintiff is not obliged to wait until the defendant had called evidence, and then to rebut such evidence. It is open to the plaintiff, to call evidence in the first instance to anticipate the defendant's case.

IN  proof of his claim to 5/16 of a cocoanut garden, plaintiff proved that forty years before action it was held by one Mudalihamy and Ettarali apparently as joint-owners; that Mudalihamy was entitled to 5/16 only of the land; that Mudaliha

Click Here to Read the rest of this document