Kelaniyage Neil Ratnayake Perera vs Dawundage Ariyasena Fernando – CA 16/99 F -2013

In the case between Kelaniyage Neil Ratnayake Perera and others (Plaintiff-Appellants) and Dawundage Ariyasena Fernando and others (Defendant-Respondents), the court addressed the issue of whether the defendants had acquired prescriptive title to a disputed portion of land (lot 2 in plan No 1684/A) as claimed under section 3 of the Prescription Ordinance. The court held that the defendants failed to establish continuous, undisturbed, and adverse possession of the property for the statutory period, thereby allowing the plaintiffs’ claim to title. The principle reaffirmed was that the burden lies on those asserting prescriptive title to prove all legal requirements. This decision relied on the Prescription Ordinance and related jurisprudence, emphasizing that prescriptive claims must be supp