Athukoralalage Don Chandrasekera vs. Athukoralalage Don Sarathchandra – SC/APPEAL/30/2016-2024

In the case between the Plaintiff (and its predecessors) and the 3rd Defendant (along with the 1st and 2nd Defendants), the court addressed whether prescriptive title to Lot 1 of the land (part of Lot B under Plan No. 48A) had been acquired by the 3rd Defendant under Section 3 of the Prescription Ordinance, No. 22 of 1871. The court examined whether adverse possession by the 3rd Defendant, based on the evidentiary record—including survey plans, testimony, and plantation history—was sufficient to extinguish the rights of the Plaintiff and 1st Defendant, who held the remainder interest while the 2nd Defendant held a life interest. It was held that the Prescription Ordinance requires unequivocal proof of ten years’ uninterrupted, adverse possession, and mere open occupation does not suffice w