Ranasinghe Arachchige Piyasena and others Vs. D.E. Jayasinghe and others – CA 480/2000-2000

In the case between D.E. Jayasinghe (substituted by Sanpinona Sendanayaka, Nihal Jayasinghe, Noel de Nelson Jayasinghe, Saman Jayashantha Jayasinghe, and Ranjula Jayasinghe) and Ranasinghe Arachchige Piyasena, Ranasinghe Arachchige Irene, Ranasinghe Arachchige Miyurin, and Ranasinghe Arachchige Gunasena, the court addressed whether the Defendants were on the subject property as tenants protected by the Rent Act or merely as licensees at the Plaintiff’s pleasure. The court determined that the Defendants failed to establish the existence of a tenancy due to lack of evidence of rent payment or a formal lease, concluding instead that the occupation was by revocable license. This reaffirmed the principle that a licensee does not acquire possessory rights upon license revocation and may be eject