Nilanthi Anula de Silva vs Weliketigedara Kemawathie – SC APPEAL 127/2013-2024

The case between Nilanthi Anula de Silva and the 4th, 5th, and 8th defendants addressed the issue of whether the corpus described in the plaint for partition had been properly identified by metes and bounds and whether such identification included the appropriate boundaries and extent of the land. It was determined that the corpus had not been properly identified due to discrepancies between the plaint’s description of a land sufficient for planting 50 coconut trees (with references to an expected extent of 110 perches) and the preliminary plan’s depiction of 47.97 perches with differing boundaries, reaffirming the principle that a partition action requires a survey substantially conforming to the land as described in the plaint. The decision relied on Section 16(1) of the Partition Law an