Carolisappu V. Anagihamy Et Al.,

1949 Present: Nagalingam J. and Windham J.

CAROLISAPPU, Appellant, and ANAGIHAMY et al, Respondents

S. C. 456-D. C. Tangalla, 5,617
 

 Prescription-Adverse possession-Continuity between an intestate and his Prescription Ordinance (Cap. 55), s. 3.

The period of possession of an intestate person can be tacked on to the possession of his heirs for the purpose of computing the period of ten years required to acquire prescriptive title under section 3 of the Prescription Ordinance.

APPEAL from a judgment of the District Court of Tangalla.

C. E. S. Perera, with T. B. Dissanayake, for plaintiff appellant.

G. W. Wijayaratne,.iov defendants respondents.

Cur. adv. vult.

November 30, 1949, NAGALINGAM J.-

This is an appeal from a judgment of the District Court of Tangalla dismissing the plaintiff's action for declaration of title to an allotment of land on the ground that though the plaintiff may have the documentary title to it the defendants have acquired a title by prescription to the allotment as against the plaintiff.

One A. M. A. Carolis who was the owner of the land under Crown grant P1 of 1914 hypothecated the allotment wit

Click Here to Read the rest of this document