Gunasekera and Another v. Uyangodage – sllr 1987 volume 1 page 242

The case between Gunasekera and Another (plaintiffs) and Uyangodage (defendant) addressed the validity of an alleged oral agreement to retransfer property upon repayment of a sum of money, in the presence of a notarial deed indicating an outright transfer. It was held that oral evidence could not vary the terms of a duly executed notarial deed as per Sections 91 and 92 of the Evidence Ordinance. The principle reaffirmed that no constructive trust could be imposed where a formal instrument expressed an unconditional transfer and the alleged condition precedent—timely repayment—had not been fulfilled. The decision relied on the Evidence Ordinance, emphasizing the exclusion of oral agreements when a written deed exists, and highlighted that failure to perform terms within the agreed period pr