Galhenage Kapila Dharmasiri vs Halhinna Guruge Dinesh Rohitha and Yasintha Dulani Anandagoda – CA PHC 224/18-2023

In the case between Galhenage Kapila Dharmasiri (Complainant-Petitioner/Respondent) and Halhinna Guruge Dinesh Rohitha, Yasintha Dulani Anandagoda (Appellants), the court addressed the issue of possession and dispossession of disputed premises under the Primary Courts’ Procedure Act. It was held that the Respondent maintained constructive possession of the premises despite the Appellants’ physical entry, which occurred through the forcible breaking of padlocks, thereby amounting to dispossession under Section 68(3). The court reaffirmed that actual or constructive possession must be evaluated in light of evidence and clarified the proper application of Sections 66 and 68 in resolving possession disputes. The decision set aside the Magistrate’s order— which had erroneously relied solely on