Thammahetti Mudalige Don Nobert Peiris Mudukatuwa v. Kulasinghe Arachchige Emalka Melani et al. – SC APPEAL 97/2015-2021

In the case between Thammahetti Mudalige and Don Nobert Peiris (Plaintiff/Appellant-Respondents) and Kulasinghe Arachchige Emalka Melani, Warnakulasooriya Aloysius Perera, Gearad Desmond, and related parties (Defendants/Defendant-Respondents), the court addressed the issue of whether the Plaintiff-Respondent’s claimed possession of the disputed land amounted to “adverse possession” under Section 3 of the Prescription Ordinance. It was held that the Plaintiff-Respondent failed to establish adverse possession, and mere long possession was insufficient without evidence of continuous, adverse, and undisturbed occupation for a period of at least ten years. The key principle reaffirmed is that a claim to prescriptive title requires clear proof of such possession. This decision relied on case law