Attanayake v. Aladin – sllr 1997 volume 3 page 386

In the case between Attanayake (plaintiff-appellant) and Aladin (defendant-respondent), the court considered whether a recovery of possession action based on a yearly permit under the Land Development Ordinance constituted a possessory action or a rei vindicatio. It was determined that the claim for ejectment required either proof of continuous possession for a year and a day or a declaration of right to possess. The findings established that, given the absence of requisite averments and a declaration of entitlement, the relief sought could not be granted. This position was affirmed by reference to established principles governing possessory actions and actions in vindication of title, reaffirming the necessity for precise pleadings under the governing statutes.

Weerasekera J. — Upon exa