Buddhipala Sirimanne vs. AKS Sumanapala and AK Dudey Sumanapala – CA PHC 105/99-2011

In the case between Buddhipala Sirimanne (Respondent-Respondent-Appellant) and AKS Sumanapala and AK Dudey Sumanapala (Petitioner-Petitioner-Respondents), the court addressed the issue of possession and management of the business and property known as “Bentota Village.” It was held that the appellant was in independent possession and management of the property and that the respondents merely acted as agents during his absence. The principle reaffirmed was that evidentiary assessment must govern the determination of actual possession and agency status. The decision relied on analysis of documentary evidence and witness affidavits and established that the High Court’s overturning of the Magistrate’s order was incorrect due to failure to consider vital evidence. The impact of the decision was