Amarasinghe v. Wanigasuriya – sllr 1994 volume 2 page 203

In Amarasinhge v. Wanigasuriya, the court examined whether a “private road” shown as physically separate from the corpus in a partition action could lawfully serve as the primary access for lots formed after partition. The petitioners—non-parties to the original partition—challenged the confirmed scheme on grounds that it impaired their exclusive rights to the roadway, while respondents, parties to the partition, maintained the legality of the scheme. It was held that partition plans must provide rights-of-way from within the corpus to a public road, and reliance on an adjacent private road outside the corpus, without substantiating an established legal or prescriptive right, is not permissible. The court reaffirmed that non-parties are entitled to object before confirmation of such a sche