Karunanayake v. Karunasiri Perera – sllr 1986 volume 2 page 027

In the case between Karunanayake (appellant) and Karunasiri Perera (respondent), the court addressed whether false statements made by the respondent could serve as corroborative evidence for the appellant’s claim that the respondent was the father of her illegitimate child under the Maintenance Ordinance. It was determined that false evidence given by the respondent, when carefully assessed according to established criteria for legal corroboration, met the required standard to support the appellant’s claim. The holding reaffirmed the principle that deliberate falsehoods on material issues, proved independently, may suffice as corroborative evidence in paternity cases. This decision relied on precedents such as Tennekoon v. Tennekoon, Dawson v. McKenzie, and R. v. Lucas, underscoring that c