Y.B. Alecman vs Hapuarachchige Don Douglas Martin Appuhamy – SC APPEAL NO 08/2014-2025

The court addressed the issue of whether a plea of non est factum could relieve a party from being bound by a document transferring his share in a cinema partnership, in the context of alleged misrepresentation and the plaintiff’s admitted act of reading and signing the document. It was held that the plea of non est factum is not available to a signatory who, having read the document, acts negligently, and that the plaintiff’s negligence precluded him from denying the transfer. The court reaffirmed the principle that negligence precludes the application of non est factum, placing a heavy burden of proof on the pleader, and clarified the evidentiary threshold required for such pleas. The decision was based on an examination of the evidence and extant authorities, and it was directed that th