T.M. Nadeera Sanjaya Tennakoon vs Tennakoon Mudiyanselage Sobana Ajith Tennakoon – CA 230/2013-2015

In the case between T.M. Nadeera Sanjaya Tennakoon (Plaintiff) and Tennakoon Mudiyanselage Sobana Ajith Tennakoon, Herath Mudiyanselage Babynona, Tennakoon Archchilage Wolter Amarasinghe, and Nishanthi Pushpa Suriyaarchchi (Defendants), the court addressed whether an interlocutory decree in a partition action could be set aside or revised on the grounds of insufficient instructions to counsel and the late introduction of legal positions, specifically concerning the applicability of Kandyan Law. It was determined that issues not contested at trial and negligence in instructing counsel do not justify setting aside or revising a decree. The principle reaffirmed is that finality of judgments in partition actions cannot be disturbed on the basis of lack of pleading or new evidence post-decree,