The case of Tikiri Kella vs. Dingiriya Duraya – CA NO.698/98 F -2021

The case between Meegahagedera Ratnapala (Plaintiff-Respondent) and Welegedera Sekara (8th Defendant-Appellant) concerned whether lots 3, 4, and 5 depicted in Preliminary Plan No. 1038 should be included within the land (corpus) subjected to partition, as opposed to being excluded based on the 8th Defendant-Appellant’s claim of separate ownership. It was held that lots 3, 4, and 5 should be included as part of the corpus, reaffirming the principle that boundaries, rather than discrepancies in land extent, are determinative in identifying property for partition purposes. The decision relied on assessment of physical boundaries, legal precedent, and consideration of the parties’ evidence, establishing that minor discrepancies in recorded area do not override clear boundary identification or