Wimalawathie v. Hemawathie And Others – sllr 2009 volume 1 page 095

In the case between Wimalawathie (Plaintiff) and Hemawathie and Others (Defendants), the court addressed the issue of whether formal proof of the execution of deeds was required under Section 68 of the Partition Law when the deeds appeared facially valid and had not been specifically disputed. The court held that mandatory formal proof cannot be insisted upon unless there is a challenge to the genuineness of the document, reaffirming the principle that later statutes which are inconsistent with earlier ones override those earlier statutes. This decision relied on the maxims lex posterior derogat priori and leges posteriors priores contrarias abrogant, and clarified the interaction between the Evidence Ordinance of 1895 and the Partition Law, emphasizing that a refusal to consider uncontest