Prematilaka v. Kularatne and Others – sllr 1996 volume 2 page 257

In the case between Prematilaka (and his predecessor in title) and Kularatne and others (including the second respondent, the Ande cultivator), the court examined whether the transfer of a paddy field complied with section 12A of the Agrarian Services Act (as amended by Act No. 2 of 1991), and clarified the jurisdictional authority between the Assistant Commissioner for Agrarian Services and the District Court on the validity of such transfers. It was held that the statutory requirements mandating notice to the Ande cultivator and the Agrarian Services Agricultural Committee were not met, and that such transfers, without compliance, are invalid. The principle “falsa demonstratio non nocet cum de corpore constat” was relied upon to address issues relating to the description and extent of th