Silva V. Dingiri Menika Et Al.

Present : The Hon. Sir Joseph T. Hutchinson,
Chief Justice, and Mr. Justice Middleton

SILVA v. DINGIRI MENIKA et al.

D. C, Kandy, 18,314

Possessory action-Proof of possession for a year and a day before ouster not necessary-Dispossession otherwise than by process of law.

To succeed in a possessory action all that is necessary for the plaintiff to prove is that he was in possession, and that he was dispossessed otherwise than by process of law. It is not necessary to prove possession for a year and a day before ouster.

THE facts material to the report are fully set out in the judgment of Hutchinson C.J.

Seneviratne, for the appellants.-The' finding of the District Judge that plaintiff had possession for a year and a day previous to ouster is unsupported by the evidence. Without proof of such possession the plaintiff cannot succeed in this action. See judgment of Lawrie J. in Perera v. Fernando.[1 (1892) 1 S. C. R. 329. ]

H. A. Jayewardene, for the respondent.-Under section 4 of Ordinance No. 22 of 1871 proof of possession for a year and a day is not necessary to maintain possessory action. See Goonewardene v. Perera,[2 (1

Click Here to Read the rest of this document