Edirimuni Asoka Rohini vs Gonagala Vithanage Malani Chandralatha – CA NO. 205/98 F-2013

The case between Edirimuni Asoka Rohini (Appellant) and Gonagala Vithanage Malani Chandralatha, Gonagala Vithanage Padma Rohini, and Kamalawathie Seneviratne (Respondents) addressed whether deed No. 60 dated 28.07.1986 constituted a mortgage or an outright sale, and whether the Respondents could be directed to re-transfer the subject land to the Appellant. It was determined that the deed was an outright sale rather than a mortgage and that the Appellant failed to meet the burden of proving laesio enormis. The findings established that oral or extrinsic evidence cannot be used to contradict the explicit terms of a notarial deed of sale under Section 92 of the Evidence Ordinance. This decision reaffirmed the longstanding principle that notarially executed documents cannot be varied or contra