Maddumage Sirisena Perera v Maddumage Nimal Gunasiri Perera – SC APPEAL NO.59/2012-2018

In the case between Maddumage Sulochana Priyangika Perera and Maddumage Nimal Gunasiri Perera (among other occupiers), the court addressed the issue of whether a right of way could be claimed over the defendant’s land based on prescription or necessity. It was held that insufficient evidence existed to support the acquisition of an easement by either prescription or necessity. The principle reaffirmed was that a prescriptive right of way requires uninterrupted, adverse use for the statutory period, and a right of necessity arises only when no reasonable alternative access is available. This decision relied on the Prescription Ordinance and Roman-Dutch law principles, establishing that the claims for both prescription and necessity could be joined but that the plaintiff’s evidence did not j