Vitiyala Kankanamge Heenhamy alias Hamine vs Seena Patabendige Roshini – SC APPEAL NO. 142/2012-2016

In the case between Seena Patabendige Roshini (Plaintiff-Appellant-Respondent) and Vitiyala Kankanamge Heenhamy (alias Hamine) and Chandrasiri Senanayake (Defendants-Respondents-Petitioners), the court addressed the issue of entitlement to Ande Cultivatorship in the context of legislative change. It was held that the 1st and 2nd Defendants, as heirs of Saradiyas Senanayaka, could not succeed as Ande Cultivators under Act No. 46 of 2000 due to the absence of applicable succession provisions. The holding reaffirmed the principle that legislative repeal can extinguish statutory rights absent transitional provisions. This decision relied on statutory interpretation of Act No. 58 of 1979 and Act No. 46 of 2000, emphasizing that on repeal and filing under the new law, no right of succession surv