Nilanthi Kumari Vs. Ranamuka Wimal Gunawardhena and others – CA 1421/2001-2011

In the case between Ranamuka Wimal Gunawardhena (plaintiff-respondent) and Nilanthi Kumari (4th defendant-appellant), with other defendants including Kulasinghe Arachchige Nihal Kulasinghe, Hettiarachchige Milton Perera, and Chandrani Pieris, the court addressed whether the plaintiff was entitled to possess the disputed land under a lease with the Town Council of Anuradhapura. The central issues were the validity of the lease due to the land’s initial designation as a playground and the plaintiff’s right to regain possession following dispossession by the defendants. It was held that the plaintiff’s lease and possession were adequately substantiated, and the defense that the lease was invalid due to the land’s intended use as a playground did not preclude the plaintiff from relief in a pos