Albert v. Ratnayake – sllr 1988 volume 2 page 246

In the case between Albert (Plaintiff) and Ratnayake (Defendant), the court addressed the dispute regarding the appropriate partition scheme for a property, focusing on the interpretation and application of Sections 33 and 36 of the Partition Law. It was determined that the scheme submitted by the Commissioner, which provided direct and equitable access to the V.C. road for all parties, was in accordance with legal principles and preferable to the alternative plan, which would have primarily benefited the 3rd defendant. The findings established that the term “modification” under Section 36 could allow for substantial alterations where necessary to effect a fair partition and was not limited to “slight alterations.” The decision reaffirmed that partition schemes should secure fairness and r