Senanayake vs. Senanayake and Others – sllr 2019 volume 1 page 293

The case between Pubudusena Senanayake (Plaintiff-Respondent) and the 3rd Defendant-Appellant (among other co-owners) addressed the issue of the inclusion of premises No.8 in a partition action. It was determined that exclusive allotment of the house to the 3rd Defendant-Appellant was justified, based on clear evidence that the improvement was effected by Gunaseeli and ultimately transferred by deed of gift. The findings established that, under Section 33 of the Partition Law, a co-owner responsible for improvements may be allotted such improvements, except where it would cause substantial injustice to others. This decision relied on relevant statutes and legal precedents, highlighting the principle that improvements effected by one co-owner and duly transferred may be allotted in a partit