Mohamedaly Adamjee V. Hadad Sadeen

[IN THE PRIVY COUNCIL]

1956 Present Earl Jowitt, Lord Oaksey, Lord Cohen, Lord Keith of
Avonholm and Mr. L. M. D. de Silva

MOHAMEDALY ADAMJEE and others, Appellants, and HADAD
SADEEN arid others, Respondents

PRIVY COUNCIL APPEAL No. 24 or 1955

S. C. 72-D. C. Colombo, 5,951

Partition action-Decree for sale-Fraudulent collusion between the parties-Effect on conclusive nature of decree-Investigation of title by Court-Effect of defective investigation-Partition Ordinance, No. 10 of 1863 (Cap. 56), ss. 2, 4, 8, 9.

Prescription-Immovable property----Claim against fideicommissarii _Burden of proof-Evidence Ordinance, s. JOG-Prescription Ordinance, ss. 3, 13.

(1) A decree entered under section 5 or section 9 of Partition Ordinance No. 10 of 1863 is conclusive against all persons whomsoever, and a person owning an interest in the land partitioned whose title even by fraudulent collusion between the parties had been concealed from the court in the partition proceedings is not entitled on that ground to have the decree set aside, his only remedy being an action for damages (even though the property is still in the sole possession of

Click Here to Read the rest of this document