Punchi Nona v. Padumasena and Others – sllr 1994 volume 2 page 117

The case between Punchi Nona and Padumasesa and Others concerned the scope of jurisdiction under the Primary Courts Procedure Act, addressing the distinction between disputes focused on possession (section 68) and those involving entitlement or right to land (section 69). It was held that the Primary Court Judge’s reliance on the grama sevaka’s report, without independent verification of a threat or likelihood of a breach of the peace, was insufficient to justify action under section 66(1)(b). Reaffirming the requirement that special jurisdiction under section 66 demands clear judicial ascertainment of a threatened breach of the peace, the decision emphasized that evidentiary reliance must extend beyond administrative reports. The order restoring possession to the 1st respondent was set as