H.M.P. Mudiyanse v. H.M. Herath Banda – CA NO. 484/97 F -2016

In H.M.P. Mudiyanse v. H.M. Herath Banda (deceased, substituted by S.A.M. Ranmenika and others), the court addressed the issue of entitlement and possession of paddy land Lot 5 (Plan No. 235/Maho/90), specifically whether the Defendant had encroached upon Lot 5, which the Plaintiff asserted was part of his Lot 272, or lawfully possessed it as part of Lot 273 by title or prescription. It was held that the Plaintiff failed to establish encroachment or possession regarding Lot 5, thereby upholding that the Defendant remained in lawful possession. The decision reaffirmed the principle that clear, cogent evidence is required to overturn findings on land possession and boundaries decided by trial courts. Reliance was placed on the Plaintiff’s failure to prove encroachment through customary means