H.A Kapila Piyasena v. Divisional Secretary, Divisional Secretariat, Badulla – CA LAND/ACQ/1/13-2016

In the case between H.A Kapila Piyasena (Appellant) and the Divisional Secretary, Divisional Secretariat, Badulla (Respondent), the court addressed whether the compensation awarded for the compulsory acquisition of the appellant’s land under the Land Acquisition Act No. 9 of 1950 was adequate and just. The court held that the compensation affirmed by the Board of Review, reflecting the status and value of the land as uncultivated paddy due to absence of irrigation, was justified and reasonable. The principle reaffirmed was that valuation for compulsory acquisition must accurately reflect the land’s actual status and potential, and may consider differential treatment only upon proof of development or authorization comparable to other lots. This decision relied on the Land Acquisition Act an