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

APPUHAMY v. MARTIN ET AL.


Appuhamy V. Martin Et Al.,

1945 Present: Soertsz A.C.J., Wijeyewardene, Cannon, Rose and
Canekeratne JJ.

APPUHAMY,
Appellant, and MARTIN et al, Respondents.

251-D. C. Matara, 8,950.

Ordinance relating to Claims to Forest, Chena, Waste and Unoccupied Lands, No. 1 of 1897, s. 4 (2)-Order of Special Officer-Binding in rem- Meaning of words " final and conclusive ".

Held by Soertsz A.C.J., Cannon, Rose, and Canekeratne JJ. (Wijeyewardene J. dissenting):-

Proceedings under the Ordinance relating to Claims to Forest, Chena, Waste and Unoccupied Lands, No. 1 of 1897, are proceedings in rem, and an order embodying an agreement or admission and falling under section 4 (2) of that Ordinance gives to the claimants mentioned in the order a title good against all others, including the claimants who failed to appear before the Special Officer.

The ruling in Kiri Menika v. Appuhamy (1916) 19 N.. L. R. 298, followed, and the modification of it in Gunasekera v. Silva (1917) 4 C. W. R. 226 and Dingiri Banda v. Podi Bandara (1927) 29 N. L. R. 357, not followed.

THIS was a case referred by Howard C.J. to a Bench of five Judges under section 51 of the Courts Ordinance.

A tract

















































































































































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