Uhanowitage Sirisena vs Eclirisinghage Somasiri – CA 347/2000-2013

In the case between Uhanowitage Sirisena (Plaintiff-Respondent) and Eclirisinghage Somasiri and others, with Uhanowitage Nanclisena as 3rd Defendant-Appellant, the court addressed whether the District Court had followed the mandatory procedures under Sections 25 and 26 of the Partition Act regarding the recording of issues and conducting an inquiry before partitioning the land. It was determined that the District Court failed to record issues and omitted to hold a proper inquiry, rendering the partition proceedings procedurally deficient. The appeal led to the setting aside of the District Court’s judgment, with a directive for a fresh inquiry to be conducted based on the original pleadings. The ruling reaffirmed the principle that strict compliance with the procedural requirements of the