Wijesundera and Others v. Constantine Dasa and Another – sllr 1987 volume 2 page 066

In the case between the widow and children of James Wijesundera (plaintiffs) and Constantine Dasa and another (defendants), the court addressed the issue of whether the defendants acquired prescriptive title to land under Section 3 of the Prescription Ordinance, despite acknowledged paper title being with the plaintiffs. The findings established that continuous and adverse possession by the defendants, coupled with maintaining occupation and supporting documentation, fulfilled the statutory criteria for prescription. The court determined that knowledge of the change in paper title did not render possession permissive or interrupt the prescriptive period. The decision reaffirmed the principle that adverse possession may lead to prescriptive title acquisition, provided that the possession is