Nanayakkara vs. Epage Dayananda et al. – SC APPEAL 2/2019-2021

In the case between Maligaspe Koralalage Arwin Peter Nanayakkara (plaintiff) and Epage Dayananda (among other defendants), the court addressed whether the District Court adequately investigated title under Partition Law No. 21 of 1977, particularly concerning deeds 4V1 to 4V10. It was determined that the 4th defendant’s contradictory submissions about the partitioned land and title created ambiguity. The holding established that the duty of title investigation in partition actions is confined by the parties’ pleadings and evidence, and the District Court is not required to initiate independent inquiries beyond the presented case. Reliance was placed on established precedents and section 25(1) of Partition Law No. 21 of 1977, affirming that the appellate challenge to the District Court’s ap