Padukka Vidanalage Gunasena and Pahala Vidanalage Don Vinee Perera vs Rupasinghe Arachchige Ason Singho and others – CA CASE NO. 853/1999-2016

In the case between Rupasinghe Arachchige Ason Singho and others (Plaintiffs/Respondents) and Padukka Vidanalage Gunasena and Pahala Vidanalage Don Vinee Perera (Defendant–Appellants), the court addressed the issue of whether an appeal was maintainable by Defendant–Appellants who failed to file statements of claim or contest issues in a partition action under the Partition Law, No. 21 of 1977. It was held that parties who remain in default in filing such claim or contest, and do not obtain leave of court to participate at trial, lack locus standi to maintain an appeal against a partition decree. This reaffirmed the principle that the right to appeal in partition actions is confined to parties who have placed their contest before the trial court and have suffered a legal grievance. The deci