R.M. Kumarihami vs. R.M. Amarasekara et al. – CA RII Application 07/2023-2023

The case between R.M. Kumarihami (and other appellants) and Dissanayake Mudiyanselage Appuhami, R.M. Siriyawathie, R.M. Danapala (among multiple respondents) including the Land Reform Commission, addressed the issue of the proper identification and measurement of the land corpus in a protracted partition dispute. The court held that the appointment of a different surveyor for the final partition plan, due to the demise of the original surveyor, did not contravene the Partition Law No. 21 of 1977. The principle reaffirmed is that Section 27(3) of the Partition Law permits the appointment of another surveyor when necessary, upholding the procedural regularity of such acts. This decision relied on the statutory framework of the Partition Law, previous judicial determinations, and the evidenti