Nuwarapakshage Neelakanthi vs Nuwarapakshage Balasuriya Wanduradeniya – CA 1063/98 F -2017

In the case between Nuwarapakshage Neelakanthi alias Baby Wanduradeniya, Damunupla (Plaintiff-Respondent) and Nuwarapakshage Balasuriya Wanduradeniya, Damunupla (Defendant-Appellant-Petitioner-Appellant), the central issue addressed concerned whether a person occupying immovable property by permission of the owner (i.e., as a licensee) could subsequently claim prescriptive title by adverse possession, and whether the Plaintiff-Respondent was entitled to eject a trespasser from property to which only a fractional title (5/6 share) was held. It was held that mere continued occupation under a license does not confer rights of adverse possession for prescriptive title unless clear evidence of adverse intent is demonstrated. Additionally, the Court affirmed that a co-owner in possession may see