Samarakoona v. Gunasekera and Another – sllr 2011 volume 1 page 149

In the case between the Plaintiff (claiming title to Lot No. 16 via purchase from co-owners) and the Defendants (occupants alleging long-standing prescriptive possession and challenging the proof of title), the Supreme Court addressed whether the plaintiff properly established title under Section 68 of the Evidence Ordinance and Section 2 of the Prevention of Frauds Ordinance. It was held that strict compliance with statutory requirements for proving notarial deeds was necessary, and the plaintiff’s failure to call attesting witnesses was fatal. The reversal of the trial court’s decision by the High Court—based on obiter dictum rather than the statutory requirements—was deemed erroneous. The Supreme Court affirmed the initial dismissal of the plaintiff’s case and allowed the appeal, reinfo