786 upto sec 40 pdf (6) (1)

Table of Contents
Section 1 ....................................................................................................................2
Section 4 ....................................................................................................................2
INTERPRETATION ..........................................................................................................3
6. Action ....................................................................................................................5
7. The procedure of an action may be either " regular " or " summary ". .......................................6
8. Procedure of action to be ordinarily regular......................................................................6
Institution of actions: in what court. ..................................................................................7
10. Of application for withdrawal and transfer of action. .........................................................8
11. Plaintiffs................................................................................................................9
12. Where joint tenants or tenants in common......................................................................9
13. Substituted and added plaintiffs................................................................................. 10
14. Defendants........................................................................................................... 10
14A.Substitution where person against whom a right to any relief is alleged to exist dies and the right
to sue for relief survives. .............................................................................................. 11
15. Who may be joined as parties defendant. ..................................................................... 13
16. Where numerous parties, one may sure or defend for all. Notice. ....................................... 13
17. Misjoinder not to defeat action. ................................................................................ 14
18.Parties improperly joined may be struck out................................................................... 15
19. Intervention not otherwise allowed. ............................................................................ 17
20. Conduct of the action.............................................................................................. 18
21. Amendment of plaint. ............................................................................................. 18
22. Objections for non-joinder or misjoinder to be taken before hearing. ................................... 19
23.Plaintiffs (or defendants) may authorize one of them to act for them.................................... 20
24.Appearances may be by party in person, his recognized agent, or attorney-at-law. ................... 20
25. Recognized agents.................................................................................................. 21
26. Processes served on the recognized agent, effectual........................................................ 22
27.Appointment of registered attorney. ............................................................................ 23
28. Death or incapacity Of registered attorney. .................................................................. 25
29. Service on registered attorney. .................................................................................. 26
30. Agent to accept service. ......................................................................................... 27
30A. Agent to accept service in action upon mortgage of immovable property. ............................ 27
[2,12 of 1973] ............................................................................................................ 27
33. Regular action how to be framed. .............................................................................. 28
34.Every action shall include whole claim.......................................................................... 28
35. Joinder of claims in actions for immovable property. ....................................................... 30
36. In other cases. ...................................................................................................... 31
37. Application by defendant in such cases. ....................................................................... 32
38. Order of court thereon. ........................................................................................... 32
39. Regular action to commence by plaint. ....................................................................... 33
Requisites of Plaint ................................................................................................... 33

Section 1
1. This Ordinance may be cited as the Civil Procedure Code.
Section 4
WHERE NO PROVISION IS MADE SPECIAL DIRECTIONS TO BE GIVEN BY COURT OF APPEAL.
IN EVERY CASE IN WHICH NO PROVISION IS MADE BY THIS ORDINANCE, THE PROCEDURE AND PRACTICE
HITHERTO IN FORCE SHALL BE FOLLOWED, AND IF ANY MATTER OF PROCEDURE OR PRACTICE FOR WHICH
NO PROVISION IS MADE BY THIS ORDINANCE OR BY ANY LAW FOR THE TIME BEING IN FORCE SHALL AFTER
THIS ORDINANCE COMES INTO OPERATION ARISE BEFORE ANY COURT, SUCH COURT SHALL THEREUPON
MAKE APPLICATION TO THE COURT OF APPEAL FOR, AND THE COURT OF APPEAL SHALL AND IS HEREBY
REQUIRED TO GIVE, SUCH SPECIAL ORDERS AND DIRECTIONS THEREUPON AS THE JUSTICE OF THE CASE
SHALL REQUIRE :
PROVIDED ALWAYS THAT NOTHING IN THIS ORDINANCE CONTAINED SHALL BE HELD IN ANY WAY TO AFFECT
OR MODIFY ANY SPECIAL RULES OF PROCEDURE WHICH, UNDER OR BY VIRTUE OF THE PROVISIONS OF ANY
ENACTMENT, MAY HAVE FROM TIME TO TIME BEEN LAID DOWN OR PRESCRIBED TO BE FOLLOWED BY ANY
CIVIL COURT IN SRI LANKA IN THE CONDUCT OF ANY ACTION, MATTER, OR THING OF WHICH ANY SUCH
COURT CAN LAWFULLY TAKE COGNIZANCE, EXCEPT IN SO FAR AS ANY SUCH PROVISIONS ARE BY THIS
ORDINANCE EXPRESSLY REPEALED OR MODIFIED.
PEIRIS v. PEIRIS SLR
1978-79, Vol :2,
Page: 55
HATTON NATIONAL BANK v. SILVA AND ANOTHER SLR
1999, Vol :3, Page:
113
MUTTIAH CHETTY v. DON MARTINES NLR Vol :10, Page: 175
DAVITH APPUHAMY v. PERERA NLR Vol :11, Page: 150
HAGENBECK et al v. VAITILINGAM et al., NLR Vol :18, Page: 1
MEINKHAMY v. PINHAMY NLR Vol :23, Page: 189
ABDUL CADER v. RAWTHER NLR Vol :29, Page: 326

INTERPRETATION
The following words and expressions in this Ordinance shall have the meanings hereby assigned to them,
unless there is something in the subject or context repugnant thereto;
"action" is a proceeding for the prevention or redress of a wrong;
[2,20 of 1977]
"Attorney-General" includes the Solicitor-General, the Additional Solicitor-General and any State
Counsel specially authorized by the Attorney-General to represent the Attorney-General;
"cause of action" is the wrong for the prevention or redress of which an action may be brought, and
includes the denial of a right, the refusal to fulfill an obligation, the neglect to perform a duty and the
infliction of an affirmative injury;
"civil court" means a court in which civil actions may be brought;
"counsel" means an attorney-at-law instructed by a registered attorney;
"court" means a Judge empowered by law to act judicially alone, or a body of Judges empowered by
law to act judicially as a body, when such Judge or body of Judges is acting judicially;
"decree" means the formal expression of an adjudication upon any right claimed or defence set up in a
civil court, when such adjudication, so far as regards the court expressing it, decides the action or
appeal; (An order rejecting a plaint is a decree within this definition.)
[2,79 of 1988]
"Fiscal" includes a Deputy Fiscal
"foreign court" means a court situate beyond the limits of, and not having authority in, Sri Lanka;
"foreign judgment" means the judgment of a foreign court;
[2,20 of 1977]
"Judge" means the presiding officer of a court and includes Judges of the Supreme Court and of the
Court of Appeal, District Judges, Judges of Family Courts and Judges of Primary Courts;
"judgment" means the statement given by the Judge of the grounds of a decree or order;
"judgment-creditor" and " decree-holder " mean any person in whose favor a decree or order capable of
execution has been made, and include any transferee of such decree or order;
"judgment-debtor" means any person against whom a decree or order capable of execution has been
made;
[2,20 of 1977]
"legal document" includes all processes, pleadings, petitions, affidavits, notices, motions and other
documents, proceedings, and written communications;
"order" means the formal expression of any decision of a civil court which is not a decree;
"original court " includes District Courts, Family Courts and Primary Courts;
[2,20 of 1977]
"Public Trustee" means the Public Trustee of Sri Lanka appointed under the Public Trustee Ordinance
and includes a Deputy Public Trustee or any other state officer generally or specially authorized by the
Public Trustee to act on his behalf;
"recognized agent" includes the persons designated under that name in section 25 and no others;
[2,20 of 1977]
" registered attorney " means an attorney-at-law appointed under Chapter V by a party or his recognized
agent to act on his behalf;
[2,20 of 1977]

"Registrar" in relation to a court - includes an Additional, Deputy or Assistant Registrar;
"signed" includes "marked" when the person making the mark is unable to write;
[2,20 of 1977]
"the Island" and "this Island" means respectively the Island of Sri lanka;
"written" and "writing" include "printed" and "print" and "lithographed" and "lithograph" respectively.
PEIRIS v. PEIRIS SLR 1978-79, Vol :2, Page: 55
UDESHI AND OTHERS v. MATHER SLR 1988, Vol :1, Page: 12
PARAMANATHAN AND ANOTHER v. KODITUWAKKUARACHCHI SLR 1988, Vol :1, Page: 315
MANAPERI SOMAWATHIE v. BUWANESWARI SLR 1990, Vol :1, Page: 223
PILAPITIYA v. BUDDADASA AND ANOTHER SLR 1990, Vol :2, Page: 186
JINADASA AND ANOTHER v. SAM SILVA AND OTHERS SLR 1994, Vol :1, Page: 232
URBAN COUNCIL, MORATUWA AND SERASINGHE v. CEYLON PAINT
INDUSTRIES
SLR 1995, Vol :2, Page: 191
G.T.E. DIRECTORIES LANKA (PVT) LTD. v. MUKTHAR MARIKKAR AND
ANOTHER
SLR 1998, Vol :3, Page: 180
BRUNSWICK EXPORTS LTD. v. HATTON NATIONAL BANK LTD. SLR 1999, Vol :1, Page: 219
EKSITH FERNANDO v. MANAWADU AND OTHERS (ST. THOMAS'
COLLEGE CASES)
SLR 2000, Vol :1, Page: 78
NARENDRA v. SEYLAN MERCHANT BANK LTD. AND OTHERS SLR 2003, Vol :2, Page: 1
PIYADASA v. SUDU BANDA SLR 2003, Vol :2, Page: 202
SHAW WALLACE AND HEDGES LTD V NIRMAL FERNANDO AND OTHERS SLR 2003, Vol :2, Page: 366
NANAYAKKARA AND OTHERS v. SIRISENA SLR 2003, Vol :3, Page: 60
SEYLAN BANK LTD V MANCHESTER YARN AND THREAD (PVT) LTD SLR 2004, Vol :3, Page: 303
DISSANAYAKE VS HEMANTHA SLR 2006, Vol :2, Page: 12
PIERIS v. PERERA NLR Vol :10, Page: 41
PLESS POL v. LADY DE SOYSA et al. NLR Vol :15, Page: 57
LOWE v. FERNANDO NLR Vol :16, Page: 398
NANNITAMBY v. VAYTILINGAM et al., NLR Vol :20, Page: 33
RANASINGHE v. PERERA NLR Vol :24, Page: 201
ABEYSUNDERA v. BABUNA et al. NLR Vol :26, Page: 459
ARULANANTHAM et al v. ATTORNEY GENERAL NLR Vol :53, Page: 364
SELVAM, A.G. v. KUDDIPILLAI, N. NLR Vol :55, Page: 426
SILVERLINE BUS CO., LTD. v. KANDY OMNIBUS CO., LTD. NLR Vol :58, Page: 193
LADAMUTTU PILLAI v. ATTORNEY GENERAL NLR Vol :59, Page: 313
SIRIPALA v. MAGIE NONA NLR Vol :59, Page: 433
TENNEKOON v. DURAISAMY NLR Vol :59, Page: 481
CROOS v. GOONEWARDENE HAMINE NLR Vol :5, Page: 259
AZIZ v. THONDAMAN NLR Vol :61, Page: 217

MUDALIGE v. WILLIAM SILVA NLR Vol :61, Page: 296
MEYAPPAN v. MANCHANAYAKE NLR Vol :62, Page: 529
SLEBERT v. NEW ASIA TRADING CO., LTD. NLR Vol :66, Page: 460
C.Y.S.PERERA v. THILLAIRAJAH NLR Vol :69, Page: 237
UNITED ENGINEERING WORKERS' UNION v. DEVANAYAGAM NLR Vol :69, Page: 289
K.THIAGARAJAH v. P.KARTHIGESU NLR Vol :69, Page: 73
PERIS v. PERERA NLR Vol :6, Page: 230
CEYLON ESTATE AGENCY AND WAREHOUSING CO. LTD. v. DE ALVIS. NLR Vol :70, Page: 31
NAVARATNAM v. SIRIWARDENA NLR Vol :70, Page: 361
MALIBAN BISCUIT MANUFACTORIES LTD. v. SUBRAMANIAM NLR Vol :74, Page: 337
MORAIS v. VICTORIA NLR Vol :75, Page: 145
BALASUNDARAM v. RAMAN NLR Vol :76, Page: 289
RAMAN CHETTY v. ABDUL RASAC NLR Vol :7, Page: 345
EMALISHAMY v. EGO APPU NLR Vol :7, Page: 38
PLESS POL v. LADY DE SOYSA et al., NLR Vol :9, Page: 316
6. Action
6. Every application to a court for relief or remedy obtainable through the exercise of the court's power
or authority, or otherwise to invite its interference, constitutes an action.
ANOTHER
SLR 1998, Vol :3, Page: 180
SADHANA DHARMABANDU VS MALLIKA HOMES LTD AND OTHERS SLR 2009, Vol :1, Page: 151
JAYAWARDENE V. OBEYSEKERE AND 5 OTHERS SLR 2011, Vol :1, Page: 349
RANASINGHE v. PERERA NLR Vol :24, Page: 201
ABEYSUNDERA v. BABUNA et al. NLR Vol :26, Page: 459
SILVERLINE BUS CO., LTD. v. KANDY OMNIBUS CO., LTD. NLR Vol :58, Page: 193

MUDIYANSE v. PEMAWATHIE NLR Vol :64, Page: 542
UNITED ENGINEERING WORKERS' UNION v. DEVANAYAGAM NLR Vol :69, Page: 289
MARTIN SILVA v. MAHASOON NLR Vol :70, Page: 6
FERNANDO v. FERNANDO NLR Vol :72, Page: 174
MALIBAN BISCUIT MANUFACTORIES LTD. v. SUBRAMANIAM NLR Vol :74, Page: 337
RAMAN CHETTY v. ABDUL RASAC NLR Vol :7, Page: 345
7. The procedure of an action may be either " regular " or "
summary ".
Illustrations
In actions of which the procedure is regular, the person against whom the application is made is called
upon to formally state his answer to the case which is alleged against him in the application before any
question of fact is entertained by the court, or its discretion thereon is in any degree exercised.
In actions of which the procedure is summary, the applicant simultaneously with preferring his
application supports with proper evidence the statement of fact made therein; and if the court in its
discretion considers that a prima facie case is thus made out
(a) either the order sought is immediately passed against the defendant before he has been afforded an
opportunity of opposing it, but subject to the expressed qualification that it will only lake effect in the
event of his not showing any good cause against it on a day appointed therein for the purpose;
(b) or a day is appointed by the court for entertaining the matter of the application on the evidence
furnished, and notice is given to the defendant that he will be heard in opposition to it on that day if he
thinks proper to come before the court for that purpose.
8. Procedure of action to be ordinarily regular.
[2,53 of 1980]
Procedure of action to be ordinarily regular.
Save and except actions in which it is by this Ordinance or any other law specially provided that
proceedings may be taken by way of summary procedure, every action shall commence and proceed by
a course of regular procedure, as hereinafter prescribed.

STASSEN EXPORTS LTD. VS. REGISTRAR OF PATENTS AND TRADE
MARKS AND OTHERS
SLR 2006, Vol :1, Page: 340
CHANDRAWATHIE VS. WIMALADASA AND OTHERS SLR 2006, Vol :1, Page: 4
ROWEL v. JAYAWARDENE NLR Vol :14, Page: 47
MOLDRICH v. CORNELIS et al. NLR Vol :14, Page: 97
PERERA v. FERNANDO et al NLR Vol :17, Page: 300
WICKREMASURIYA v. MUDIANSE NLR Vol :31, Page: 344
JEGANATHAN v. RAMANATHAN NLR Vol :64, Page: 289
MUDIYANSE v. PEMAWATHIE NLR Vol :64, Page: 542
CHARTERED BANK v. DE SILVA NLR Vol :67, Page: 135
WIJEWARDENE v. GOMES NLR Vol :70, Page: 97
Institution of actions: in what court.
9. Subject to the pecuniary or other limitations prescribed by any law, action shall be instituted in the
court within the local limits of whose jurisdiction
(a) a party defendant resides; or
(b) the land in respect of which the action is brought lies or is situate in whole or in part; or
(c) the cause of action arises; or
When one of two or more courts may entertain an action.
When it is alleged to be uncertain within the local limits of the jurisdiction of which of two or more
courts any immovable property is situate, any one of those courts may, if satisfied that there is ground
for the alleged uncertainty, record a statement to that effect, and thereupon proceed to entertain and
dispose of any action relating to that property; and its decree in the action shall have the same effect
as if the property were situate within the local limits of its jurisdiction:
Provided that the action is one with respect to which the court is competent as regards the nature and
value of the action to exercise jurisdiction.
SOMASIRI v. CEYLON PETROLEUM CORPORATION SLR 1992, Vol :1, Page: 39
BLUE DIAMONDS LIMITED v. AMSTERDAM ROTTERDAM BANK M.V. AND
ANOTHER (AMRO BANK CASE)
SLR 1993, Vol :2, Page: 249
CHITAMBARA NADAR AND ANOTHER OF COLOMBO v. ELASTO LIMITED
OF BENTOTA
SLR 1994, Vol :2, Page: 325
MARTIN SILVA AND ANOTHER v. CENTRAL ENGINEERING CONSULTANCY
BUREAU AND ANOTHER
SLR 2003, Vol :2, Page: 228
ARIYARATNE vs PREMADASA SLR 2006, Vol :3, Page: 161

DAVITH APPUHAMY v. PERERA NLR Vol :11, Page: 150
LALLTETT v. NEGRIS & Co NLR Vol :14, Page: 247
PLESS POL v. LADY DE SOYSA et al. NLR Vol :15, Page: 57
SITHAMPARAM v. PONAN NLR Vol :19, Page: 33
HUSSAN v. PEIRIS et al., NLR Vol :34, Page: 238
VYTHILINGAM v. ARUNASALEM NLR Vol :53, Page: 417
MILLER v. MURRAY NLR Vol :54, Page: 25
NALLATHAMBY et al., v. SOMASUNDERAM-KURUKKAL NLR Vol :57, Page: 166
SOWDOONA v. ABDUL MUEES NLR Vol :57, Page: 75
PELIS v. SILVA NLR Vol :60, Page: 289
COMMISSIONER OF AGRARIAN SERVICES v. KUMARASAMY NLR Vol :62, Page: 574
TENNE v. EKANAYAKE NLR Vol :63, Page: 544
PONNUTHURAI v. JUHAR NLR Vol :66, Page: 375
GUNAWARDENE v. URBAN COUNCIL NLR Vol :73, Page: 233
ANIS v. SILVA NLR Vol :73, Page: 309
PERERA v. CHELLIAH NLR Vol :74, Page: 61
RANGHAMI v. KIRIHAMY NLR Vol :7, Page: 357
WRIGHT v. WRIGHT NLR Vol :9, Page: 31
PLESS POL v. LADY DE SOYSA et al., NLR Vol :9, Page: 316
10. Of application for withdrawal and transfer of action.
[3,20 1977]
10. Any of the parties to an action which is pending in any original court may, before trial, and after
notice in writing to the other parties of his intention so to do, apply to the Court of Appeal by motion,
which shall be supported by affidavit setting out the grounds on which it is based, for the withdrawal of
such action from the court in which it is pending and for the transfer of it for trial to any other court
competent to try the same in respect of its nature and the amount or value of its subject-matter. And
the Court of Appeal may, on any such application after hearing such of the parties as desire to be heard,
and on being satisfied that such withdrawal and transfer are desirable for any of the following reasons;
(a) that a fair and impartial trial cannot be had in any particular court or place; or
(b) that some question of law of unusual difficulty is likely to arise; or
(c) that it is expedient on any other ground,
Withdraw any such action pending in any such court, and transfer it for trial to any other such court as
aforesaid, upon any terms that the Court of Appeal shall think fit. When the action might have been
instituted in any one of several courts, the balance of convenience only shall be deemed sufficient cause
for such withdrawal and transfer to one of the alternative courts.

Stamp duty.
In no case in which any action is so transferred as aforesaid from one court to another shall any stamp
fee be leviable in the court to which the action is transferred on any pleading or exhibit on which the
proper stamp fee has been paid in the court from which the action is so transferred.
SIVASUBRAMANIAM v. SIVASUBRAMANIAM SLR 1980, Vol :2, Page: 58
JAYASINGHE VS DASSANAYAKE AND ANOTHER SLR 2006, Vol :3, Page: 346
RATNAWATHIE v. SAMARASINGHE NLR Vol :68, Page: 211
SOMAWATHIE v. DANNY NLR Vol :76 PAGE 571
11. Plaintiffs.
11. All persons may be joined as plaintiffs in whom the right to any relief claimed is alleged to exist,
whether jointly, severally, or in the alternative, in respect of the same cause of action. And judgment
may be given for such one or more of the plaintiffs as may be found to be entitled to relief for such relief
as he or they may be entitled to, without any amendment of the plaint for that purpose. But the
defendant though unsuccessful, shall be entitled to his costs occasioned by so joining any person who is
not found entitled to relief, unless the court in disposing of the costs of the action otherwise directs.
ADLIN FERNANDO AND ANOTHER v. LIONEL FERNANDO AND OTHERS SLR 1995, Vol :2, Page: 25
MASEENA v. SAHUD AND ANOTHER SLR 2003, Vol :3, Page: 109
IBRAHIM DIDI et al. v. ALLI DIDI NLR Vol :13, Page: 181
MUTTU MENIKA v. FERNANDO et al., NLR Vol :15, Page: 429
FERNANDO, B.J. v. SUNTHARY PILLAI NLR Vol :45, Page: 126
THANGAMMAH v. KANAGASABAI NLR Vol :51, Page: 500
WEERAPPERUMA v. DE SILVA NLR Vol :61, Page: 481
D. D. L. KALUARACHCHI . v. CEYLON TRANSPORT BOARD NLR Vol :76, Page: 173
DON SIMON APPUHAMI et al., v. MARTHELIS ROSA NLR Vol :9, Page: 68
12. Where joint tenants or tenants in common
12. Where two or more persons are entitled to the possession of immovable property as joint tenants or tenants
in common, one or more of them may maintain an action in respect of his or their undivided shares in the
property in any case where such an action might be maintained by all.
SUSIL PERERA v. KELLY AND OTHERS SLR
2002, Vol :3, Page:
163
ABREW V. SEKERAM SLR
2003, Vol :1, Page:
381

WALKER & SONS CO. LTD V MASOOD SLR
2004, Vol :3, Page:
195
IBRAHIM DIDI et al. v. ALLI DIDI NLR Vol :13, Page: 181
IMPERIAL BANK OF INDIA, LTD. v. SILVA et al., NLR Vol :34, Page: 346
ZEINUDEEN v. SAMSADEEN et al., NLR Vol :41, Page: 65
ROCKLAND DISTILLERIES v. AZEEZ NLR Vol :52, Page: 490
SILVA v. SINNO APPU NLR Vol :7, Page: 5
13. Substituted and added plaintiffs.
13. Where an action has been instituted in the name of the wrong person as plaintiff, or where it is doubtful
whether it has been instituted in the name of the right plaintiff, the court may at any stage of the action, if
satisfied that the action has been so commenced through a bona fide mistake, and that it is necessary for the
determination of the real matter in dispute so to do, order any other person or persons, with his or their
consent, to be substituted or added as plaintiff or plaintiffs, upon such terms as the court thinks just.
IRANGANIE v. ABEYRATNE AND OTHERS SLR
1991, Vol :2, Page:
183
SEYLAN BANK PLC V LEBBE MOHOMED RAZIK SLR
2009, Vol :2, Page:
139
NORTHWAY v. NAATCHIA NLR Vol :15, Page: 30
MARICAR v. ISMAIL NLR Vol :16, Page: 362
KANDASWAMY v. SINNATAMBY NLR Vol :26, Page: 63
ARNOLIS v. LEWISHAMY NLR Vol :2, Page: 222
MATTHES v. ROTTAN NLR Vol :2, Page: 366
RAMAN CHETTY v. SHAWE et at., NLR Vol :33, Page: 16
SIRIWARDANE v. AMUNUGAMA GUNARATNA THERO NLR Vol :66, Page: 383
D. D. L. KALUARACHCHI . v. CEYLON TRANSPORT
BOARD
NLR Vol :76, Page: 173
GORDON BROOKE v. PEERA VEDA NLR Vol :9, Page: 302
14. Defendants.
All persons may be joined as defendants against whom the right to any relief is alleged to exist, whether
jointly, severally, or in the alternative, in respect of the same cause of action. And judgment may be given
against such one or more of the defendants as may be found to be liable, according to their respective liabilities,
without any amendment.
MACKIE & SONS v. MACKIE & ANOTHER SLR 1999, Vol :3, Page: 386

JAGODA V TUDAWE SLR 2004, Vol :2, Page: 147
COREA v. PIERIS NLR Vol :10, Page: 321
RATWATTE v. NUGAWELA NLR Vol :15, Page: 1
AIYAMPILLAI v. VAIRAVANATHA KURRUKEL NLR Vol :16, Page: 231
LOWE v. FERNANDO NLR Vol :16, Page: 398
LONDON AND LANCASHIRE FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY v. P & O
COMPANY et al.,
APPUHAMY v. APPUHAMY NLR Vol :21, Page: 436
RAMEN CHETTY v. MACKWOOD NLR Vol :24, Page: 73
KANAGASABAPATHY v. KANAGASABAI et al., NLR Vol :25, Page: 173
FERNANDO v. PALANIAPPA CHETTY NLR Vol :28, Page: 273
MUTTIAH CHETTY v. DE SILVA et al., NLR Vol :2, Page: 109
FERNANDO v. DE SILVA NLR Vol :2, Page: 223
FERNANDO et al., v. FERNANDO NLR Vol :39, Page: 145
ROCHE ET AL. v. KEERTHIRATNE ET AL ., NLR Vol :46, Page: 97
PODIHAMY ET AL v. SEIMON APPU NLR Vol :47, Page: 503
ARULANANTHAM et al v. ATTORNEY GENERAL NLR Vol :53, Page: 364
JUHAR et al v. RAMANATHAN NLR Vol :53, Page: 454
JAYASEKERA v. SINNA KARUPPAN NLR Vol :69, Page: 88
PONNUDURAI v. SITHAMPARAPILLAI NLR Vol :71, Page: 315
SIRISENA AND OTHERS v. HONOURABLE.H.S.R.B.
KOBBEKADUWA,MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE AND LANDS
14A.Substitution where person against whom a right to any relief
is alleged to exist dies and the right to sue for relief survives.
(1) Where a person against whom the right to any relief is alleged to exist is dead and the right to sue for
such relief survives, the person in whom such right is alleged to exist, may make an application by way of
summary procedure supported by affidavit to the court in which an action for the same may be instituted, in
the following manner:-
(a) Where such person has died intestate leaving an estate, specifying the name, description, and place of
abode of any person whom he alleges to be the legal representative, as defined in section 394 (2), of the
deceased and whom he desires to be made the defendant in the proposed action in place of the deceased.
Such application shall also specify the name, description, and place of abode of the person or persons whom
the applicant alleges to be the other heir or heirs of the deceased; or

(b) Where probate of the will or letters of administration to the estate of the deceased has not been issued or
its issue is likely to be unduly delayed, specifying, the name, description, and place of abode of any person
whom he alleges to be the person to whom probate of the will or letters of administration to the estate of the
deceased would ordinarily be issued and whom he desires to be made the defendant in the proposed action in
place of the deceased. Such application shall also specify the name, description, and place of abode of the
person or persons whom the applicant alleged to be the heir or heirs of the deceased.
(2) Upon receipt of an application under paragraph (a) of subsection (1), and the court where it is satisfied
that there are grounds therefor, and, after the issue of notice on the representative named in such application
and such other persons, if any, and after causing notice of such application, (in the form No.2A in the First
Schedule) to be advertised in a local newspaper to be selected by the court, or by such other mode of
advertisement in lieu of such publication as to the court seems sufficient, and after such inquiry as the court
may consider necessary and upon such terms as it thinks fit, the court may order that such representative or
such other person as the court may consider fit be appointed in place of the deceased, for the institution of
such action:
Provided, that the person to be so appointed in place of the deceased may object that he is not the legal
representative of the deceased or that he should not be appointed in place of the deceased.
(3) Upon receipt of an application under paragraph (b) of subsection (1), the court may, where it is satisfied
that probate of the will or letters of administration to the estate of the deceased has not been issued or is likely
to be unduly delayed, and, after the issue of notice on the person alleged in such application to be the person
to whom probate of the will or letters of administration to the estate of the deceased would ordinarily be issued
and such other persons, if any, causing notice of such application, (in the form No. 2A in the First Schedule)
to be advertised in a local newspaper to be selected by the court or by some other mode of advertisement in
lieu of such publication as to the court seems sufficient, and after such inquiry as the court may consider
necessary and upon such terms as it thinks fit, order that the person, who appears to the court to be the
person to whom probate of the will or letters of administration to the estate of the deceased would ordinarily
be issued, be appointed in place of the deceased, for the institution of such action:
Provided, that the person to be so appointed may object that he is not the person to whom probate of the will
or letters of administration to the estate of the deceased would ordinarily be issued or that he should not be
appointed in place of the deceased.
(4) Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection (2) or subsection (3), the court may make an order under
any one of those subsections, only where-
(a) it is satisfied that the delay in the institution of the action would render such action not maintainable by
reason of the provisions of the Prescription Ordinance; or
(b) a period of six months had lapsed after the death of the deceased.
(5) Where after an order appointing a representative in place of the deceased has been made under subsection
(2) or subsection (3) and an action instituted against such person in place of such deceased, an executor of

the will, or an administrator of the estate, as the case may be, of such deceased, is appointed in proceedings
instituted under Chapter XXXVIII of this Code, such executor or administrator shall, on the application by way
of summary procedure, supported by affidavit, made by the plaintiff or any other party to such action or by
such executor or administrator, be substituted in place of the person appointed under subsection (2) or
subsection (3), and the action shall thereupon proceed in the same manner as if such executor or administrator
had originally been made a defendant, and had been a party to the previous proceedings in the action.
NILAMDEEN v. DAYANANDA AND OTHERS SLR
2002, Vol :1, Page:
160
HARIPALA AND OTHERS VS MALLIKA FERNANDO AND OTHERS SLR
2005, Vol :1, Page:
417
DARLEY BUTLER & Co. Ltd v ANOOS AND OTHERS SLR
2008, Vol :2, Page:
149
15. Who may be joined as parties defendant.
The plaintiff may, at his option, join as parties to the same action all or any of the persons severally, or jointly
and severally, liable on any one contract, including parties to bills of exchange and promissory notes.
THE MAHAKANDE HOUSING COMPANY LTD. v. DUHILAMOMAL AND
OTHERS
SLR 1981, Vol :2, Page: 232
FERNANDO v. PERERA NLR Vol :21, Page: 94
APPUHAMY v. WALKER et al., NLR Vol :22, Page: 313
MUTTIAH CHETTY v. DE SILVA et al., NLR Vol :2, Page: 109
16. Where numerous parties, one may sure or defend for all.
Notice.
Where there are numerous parties having a common interest in bringing or defending an action, one or more
of such parties may, with the permission of the defend for all. court, sue or be sued, or may defend in such an
action on behalf of all parties so interested.
But the court shall in such case give, at the expense of the party applying so to sue or defend, notice of the
institution of the action to all such parties, either by personal service or (if from the number of parties or any
other cause such service is not reasonably practicable, then) by public advertisement, as the court in each case
may direct.

RANASINGHE v. NANDANIE ABEYDEERA SLR
1997, Vol :3, Page:
401
PINTO v. TRELLEBORG LANKA (PVT) LTD AND ANOTHER SLR
2003, Vol :3, Page:
214
FELIX PREMAWARDANE VS BASNAYAKE AND OTHERS SLR
2005, Vol :3, Page:
205
RANJITH DE SILVA vs DAYANANDA AND OTHERS SLR
2006, Vol :1, Page:
305
SUGATHAANANDA THERA VS. AJlTH BODINAGODA AND OTHERS SLR
2006, Vol :3, Page:
315
READ v. SAMSUDIN NLR Vol :1, Page: 292
JAYAWARDENE v. THE BAPTIST MISSIONARY SOCIETY et al., NLR Vol :25, Page: 97
SILVA v. LOW-COUNTRY PRODUCTS ASSOCIATION NLR Vol :39, Page: 228
SUPPIAH PILLAI et al., v. RAMANATHAN et al., NLR Vol :39, Page: 90
CAROLINE SOYSA v. LADY RATWATTE NLR Vol :45, Page: 553
KANDASAMY v. KUMARASEKARAM NLR Vol :63, Page: 193
17. Misjoinder not to defeat action.
No action shall be defeated by reason of the misjoinder or non-joinder of parties, and the court may in every
action deal with the matter in controversy so far as regards the rights and interests of the parties actually
before it.
Nothing in this Ordinance shall be deemed to enable plaintiffs to join in respect of distinct causes of action.
If the consent of anyone who ought to be joined as a plaintiff cannot be obtained, he may be made a defendant,
the reasons therefor being stated in the plaint.
WAHARAKA ALIAS MORATOTA SOBHITA THERO v. AMUNUGAMA
RATNAPALA THERO
SLR 1981, Vol :1, Page: 201
COLGAN AND OHTERS v. UDESHI AND OTHERS SLR 1996, Vol :2, Page: 220
CHARLES PERERA AND ANOTHER v KOTIGALA. SLR 2004, Vol :2, Page: 67
HAPUARATCHI AND ANOTHER VS DHANAPALA AND ANOTHER SLR 2005, Vol :3, Page: 141
JAYAMPATHI AND ANOTHER v KUDABANDA SLR 2008, Vol :2, Page: 289
JAYAMAHA et al., v. SINGAPPU NLR Vol :13, Page: 348

MADAR SAIBO et al v. SIRAJUDEEN et al NLR Vol :17, Page: 97
RALPH MACDONALD & CO. v. THE COLOMBO HOTELS COMPANY NLR Vol :19, Page: 109
HEENHAMI v. MOHOTIHAMI NLR Vol :19, Page: 235
ABDUL CADER ET AL v. AHAMADU LEBBE MARIKAR ET AL NLR Vol :37, Page: 257
SINNATHAMBY et al., v. KANDIAH et al., NLR Vol :56, Page: 535
T.A.DINGIRI APPUHAMY v. TALAKOLAWEWE PANGANANDA THERO NLR Vol :67, Page: 89
WERAGAMA v. BANDARA NLR Vol :77, Page: 289
DON SIMON APPUHAMI et al., v. MARTHELIS ROSA NLR Vol :9, Page: 68
18.Parties improperly joined may be struck out.
Addition of parties.
(1) The court may on or before the hearing, upon the application of either party, and on such terms as the
court thinks just, order that the name of any party, whether as plaintiff or as defendant improperly joined, be
struck out; and the court may at any time, either upon or without such application, and on such terms as the
court thinks just, order that any plaintiff be made a defendant, or that any defendant be made a plaintiff, and
that the name of any person who ought to have been joined, whether as plaintiff or defendant, or whose
presence before the court may be necessary in order to enable the court effectually and completely to
adjudicate upon and settle all the questions involved in that action, be added.
(2) Every order for such amendment or for alteration of parties shall state the facts and reasons which together
form the ground on which the order is made. And in the case of a party being added, the added party or parties
shall be named, with the designation " added party ", in all pleadings or processes or papers entitled in the
action and made after the date of the order.
ARUMUGAM COOMARASWAMY v. ANDRIS APPUHAMY AND OTHERS SLR 1985, Vol :2, Page: 219
EUGIN FERNANDO v. CHARLES PERERA AND OTHERS SLR 1988, Vol :2, Page: 228
DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER v. SIRISENA SLR 1990, Vol :1, Page: 44
IRANGANIE v. ABEYRATNE AND OTHERS SLR 1991, Vol :2, Page: 183
ROBERT DASSANAYAKE AND ANOTHER v. PEOPLE'S BANK AND ANOTHER SLR 1995, Vol :2, Page: 320
COLOMBO SHIPPING CO. LTD. v. CHIRAYU CLOTHING (PVT) LTD. SLR 1995, Vol :2, Page: 97
AMEEN v. SALAHUDEEN & OTHERS SLR 1998, Vol :3, Page: 185
FERNANDO v. WICKREMASINGHE SLR 1998, Vol :3, Page: 37

PANADURA FINANCE & ENTERPRISES LTD. v. PERERA AND ANOTHER SLR 1999, Vol :1, Page: 358
NAJIMDEEN AND OTHERS v. NAGESHWARI AND OTHERS SLR 1999, Vol :3, Page: 123
ROHANA v. SHYAMA ATTYGALA &OTHERS SLR 1999, Vol :3, Page: 381
MACKIE & SONS v. MACKIE & ANOTHER SLR 1999, Vol :3, Page: 386
HILDA ENID PERERA v. SOMAWATHIE LOKUGE AND ANOTHER SLR 2000, Vol :3, Page: 200
FERNANDO v. DE SILVA AND OTHERS SLR 2000, Vol :3, Page: 29
PARAMALINGAM v. SIRISENA AND ANOTHER SLR 2001, Vol :2, Page: 239
KEERTHIWANSA v. URBAN COUNCIL HORANA AND 3 OTHERS SLR 2001, Vol :3, Page: 252
SENEVIRATNE v. FERNANDO AND OTHERS SLR 2001, Vol :3, Page: 72
KULARATNE v. SAMARAWICKREMA AND ANOTHER SLR 2003, Vol :2, Page: 152
JUDUWARA & OTHERS . V L.B. FINANCE CO. LTD. SLR 2004, Vol :2, Page: 151
KAMALAWATHIE AND OTHERS VS. FERNANDO AND ANOTHER SLR 2005, Vol :2, Page: 349
DORIS SIRIWARDANE AND OTHERS VS DE SILVA SLR 2006, Vol :2, Page: 309
KAROUS VS.DHARMARATHANA THERO AND OTHERS SLR 2006, Vol :2, Page: 320
SITHY MAKEENA AND OTHERS VS. KURAISHA AND OTHERS SLR 2006, Vol :2, Page: 341
DARLEY BUTLER & Co. Ltd v ANOOS AND OTHERS SLR 2008, Vol :2, Page: 149
JAYAMPATHI AND ANOTHER v KUDABANDA SLR 2008, Vol :2, Page: 289
MASTER DIVERS (PVT.) LTD., VS. ANUSHA KARUNARATNE AND OTHERS SLR 2010, Vol :1, Page: 403
FERNANDO V. TENNAKOON SLR 2010, Vol :2, Page: 22
COREA v. PIERIS NLR Vol :10, Page: 321
COREA v. PIERIS et al., NLR Vol :13, Page: 212
JAYAMAHA et al., v. SINGAPPU NLR Vol :13, Page: 348
CAROLIS APPU v. DIONIS APPU et al. NLR Vol :14, Page: 390
RALPH MACDONALD & CO. v. THE COLOMBO HOTELS COMPANY NLR Vol :19, Page: 109
MEIDEEN v. BANDA (WALATAPPA CHETTY, Claimant) NLR Vol :1, Page: 51
SUPPIAH v. CROOS NLR Vol :22, Page: 97
BANDA v. DHARMARATNE NLR Vol :24, Page: 210
HORATALA v. SANCHI et al., NLR Vol :26, Page: 426
GOVERNMENT AGENT, SABARAGAMUWA v. ASIRWATHAN et al., NLR Vol :29, Page: 367
FERNANDO et al., v. ARNOLIS NLR Vol :32, Page: 328
DE SILVA v. NONOHAMY et al., NLR Vol :34, Page: 113
KUMARIHAMY v. DISSANAYAKE et al NLR Vol :37, Page: 345
THANGAMMA v. NAGALINGAM NLR Vol :39, Page: 143

ARUMOGAM v. VAITHIALINGAM NLR Vol :43, Page: 493
SINNALEBBE v. MUSTAPHA NLR Vol :51, Page: 541
NALLAKARUPPEN CHETTIAR et al. v. HEPPONSTALL NLR Vol :52, Page: 396
IBRAHIM SAIBO, A.M.M. v. MANSOOR, S.D.M. NLR Vol :54, Page: 217
DON ALWIS v. VILLAGE COMMITTEE OF HIRIPITIYA NLR Vol :54, Page: 225
SINNATHAMBY et al., v. KANDIAH et al., NLR Vol :56, Page: 535
THE UNITED INDIA FIRE AND GENERAL INSURANCE CO., LTD., v.
WEINMAN
PERERA v. DINGIRI MENIKA NLR Vol :63, Page: 169
JAYASUNDERA v. WEERAPPERUMA NLR Vol :64, Page: 265
KANAGAMMAH v. KUMARAKULASINGHAM NLR Vol :66, Page: 529
CHARTERED BANK v. DE SILVA NLR Vol :67, Page: 135
PEERIS v. KIRILAMAYA NLR Vol :71, Page: 52
GOVERNMENT AGENT KALUTARA v. GUNARATNA NLR Vol :71, Page: 58
THEIVANAIPILLAI v. NALLIAH NLR Vol :74, Page: 307
AHAMADO LEBBE v. MARIS APPU et al., NLR Vol :9, Page: 289
19. Intervention not otherwise allowed.
No person shall be allowed to intervene in a pending action otherwise than in pursuance of, and in conformity
with, the provisions of the last preceding section. And no person shall be added as plaintiff, or as the next
friend of a plaintiff, without his own consent thereto;
Except in under section 16.
Provided however that any person on cases whose behalf an action is instituted or under section defended may
apply to the 16. court to be made a party, and all parties whose names are so added as defendants shall be
served with a summons in manner hereinafter mentioned, and the proceedings as against them shall be
deemed to have begun only on the service of such summons.

COLOMBO SHIPPING CO. LTD. v. CHIRAYU
CLOTHING (PVT) LTD.
SLR
1995, Vol :2,
Page: 97
FERNANDO V. TENNAKOON SLR
2010, Vol :2,
Page: 22
MAPALATHAN v. ELAYAVAN NLR
Vol :41, Page:
115
D. D. L. KALUARACHCHI . v. CEYLON
TRANSPORT BOARD
NLR
Vol :76, Page:
173
20. Conduct of the action.
The court may give the conduct of the action to such plaintiff as it deems action proper.
No cases.
21. Amendment of plaint.
Where a defendant is added, the plaint shall, unless the court direct otherwise, be amended in such manner
as may be necessary, and a copy of the amended plaint shall be served on the new defendant and on the
original defendants.
HUSSAIN v. WADOOD AND
ANOTHER
SLR 1984, Vol :2, Page: 24
COLOMBO SHIPPING CO. LTD. v.
CHIRAYU CLOTHING (PVT) LTD.
SLR 1995, Vol :2, Page: 97
ROHANA v. SHYAMA ATTYGALA
&OTHERS
SLR 1999, Vol :3, Page: 381
SENEVIRATNE v. FERNANDO AND
OTHERS
SLR 2001, Vol :3, Page: 72
NIMALRAJ VS. THARMARAJAH AND
OTHERS
SLR 2005, Vol :3, Page: 309
ATUKORALE v. SAMYNATHAN NLR Vol :41, Page: 165
THOMAS SILVA v. HEMALATHA
HAMINE

LEBBE v. SANDANAM NLR Vol :64, Page: 461
D. D. L. KALUARACHCHI . v. CEYLON
TRANSPORT BOARD
22. Objections for non-joinder or misjoinder to be taken before
hearing.
All objections for want of parties, or for joinder of parties who have no interest in the action, or for misjoinder
as co- plaintiffs or co-defendants, shall be taken at the earliest possible opportunity, and in all cases before
the hearing. And any such objection not so taken shall be deemed to have been waived by the defendant.
ADLIN FERNANDO AND ANOTHER v. LIONEL FERNANDO AND
OTHERS
SLR 1995, Vol :2, Page: 25
SUSIL PERERA v. KELLY AND OTHERS SLR 2002, Vol :3, Page: 163
JOHN SINNO v. JULIS APPU NLR Vol :10, Page: 351
THE BANK OF CHETTINAD. LTD. v. THAMBIAH et al., NLR Vol :35, Page: 190
SLR 1995, Vol :2, Page

23.Plaintiffs (or defendants) may authorize one of them to act
for them.
When there are more plaintiffs than one, any one or more of them may be authorized by any other of them
to appear, plead, or act for such other in any proceeding under this Ordinance; and in like manner, when there
are more defendants than one, any one or more of them may be authorized by any other of them to appear,
plead, or act for such other in any such proceeding. The authority shall be in writing signed by the party giving
it, and shall be filed in court.
KANAGASUNDERAM v. SINNIAH NLR Vol :32, Page: 43
24.Appearances may be by party in person, his recognized
agent, or attorney-at-law.
Any appearance, application, or act in or to any court, required or authorized by law to be made or done by
a party to an action or appeal in such court, except only such appearances, applications, or acts as by any law
for the time being in force only attorneys-at-law are authorized to make or do, and except when by any such
law otherwise expressly provided, may be made or done by the party in person, or by his recognized agent,
or by an attorney-at-law duly appointed by the party or such agent to act on behalf of such party :
Provided that any such appearance shall be made by the party in person, if the court so directs. An attorney-
at-law instructed by a registered attorney for this purpose, represents the registered attorney in court.
GANGULWITIGAMA PANNALOKA THERO v. COLOMBO SARANANKARA
THERO AND OTHERS
SLR 1983, Vol :1, Page: 332
HAMEED v. DEEN AND OTHERS SLR 1988, Vol :2, Page: 1
JINADASA AND ANOTHER v. SAM SILVA AND OTHERS SLR 1994, Vol :1, Page: 232
SHAFEER v. DHARMAPALA SLR 1995, Vol :2, Page: 181
FERNANDO v. SYBIL FERNANDO AND 2 OTHERS SLR 1996, Vol :2, Page: 169
FERNANDO v. SYBIL FERNANDO AND OTHERS SLR 1997, Vol :3, Page: 1
FERNANDO v. CEYLON BREWERYS LTD. SLR 1998, Vol :3, Page: 61
PAUL COIR (PVT) LTD. v. WAAS SLR 2000, Vol :2, Page: 167
DISTILLERIES COMPANY LTD. v. KARIYAWASAM AND OTHERS SLR 2001, Vol :3, Page: 119
WIJESUNDARA v. WIJESUNDARA SLR 2003, Vol :1, Page: 374
JAYAWARDENA AND OTHERS VS SAMPATH BANK SLR 2005, Vol :2, Page: 83

KANDASAMY VS. KANDASAMY SLR 2006, Vol :2, Page: 260
KAROLIS v WICKREMARATNE SLR 2008, Vol :1, Page: 193
JEEVANI INVESTMENTS (PVT) LTD. v WIJESENA PERERA SLR 2008, Vol :1, Page: 207
RANJITH PERERA AND ANOTHER v DHARMADASA AND OTHERS SLR 2008, Vol :1, Page: 377
SOMASUNDARAM v. IBRAHIM SAIBU NLR Vol :1, Page: 297
IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION OF FERNANO, L.S. NLR Vol :27, Page: 245
ANDIAPPA CHETTIAR v. SANMUGAM CHETTIAR NLR Vol :33, Page: 217
WARNASURIYA v. LUCY NONA et al., NLR Vol :49, Page: 313
URBAN COUNCIL OF DEHIWELA MOUNT LAVINIA et al., v. ANDY SILVA NLR Vol :57, Page: 562
MOHIDEEN ALI v. HASSIM NLR Vol :62, Page: 457
WICKRAMATILAKE v. DARSIN DE SILVA NLR Vol :62, Page: 97
RAJENDRA v. PARAKRAMAS LTD. NLR Vol :63, Page: 553
WIJESINGHE v. INCORPORATED COUNCIL OF LEGAL EDUCATION NLR Vol :65, Page: 364
WILLIAM SILVA v. SIRISENA NLR Vol :68, Page: 206
25. Recognized agents.
The recognized agents of parties by whom such appearances and applications may be made or acts may be
done are
(a) the Attorney-General, on behalf of the State in respect of any court; who is also authorized to depute his
power of appointing a registered attorney on behalf of the State in respect to any court to any person by a
written document to be signed by the Attorney-General, and to be filed in that court;
(b) persons holding general powers of attorney from parties not resident within the local limits of the
jurisdiction of the court within which limits the appearance or application is made or act done, authorizing
them to make such appearances and applications, and do such acts on behalf of such parties; which power,
or a copy thereof certified by an attorney-at-law or notary, shall in each case be filed in the court;
[4,20 of 1977]
(c) persons carrying on trade or business for and in the names of parties not resident within the local limits of
the jurisdiction of the court within which limits the appearance or application is made or act done, in matters
connected with such trade or business only, where no other agent is expressly authorized to make such
appearances and applications and do such acts.
SCIENCE HOUSE (CEYLON) LIMITED. v. I. P. A. LABORATORIES PRIVATE
LIMITED.
SLR 1989, Vol :1, Page: 155

DAMAYANTHI ABEYWARDENE AND ANOTHER v. HEMALATHA
ABEYWARDENE AND OTHERS
SLR 1993, Vol :1, Page: 272
GRICILDA HEWA v. THOMAS HEWA SLR 1998, Vol :3, Page: 43
WIJESUNDARA v. WIJESUNDARA SLR 2003, Vol :1, Page: 374
JAYATILAKE v. LIYANAGE AND ANOTHER SLR 2003, Vol :2, Page: 190
UMMA ANINA v. JAWAHAR SLR 2004, Vol :2, Page: 1
VELAPPA CHETTY v. MEYDIN NLR Vol :1, Page: 333
THE BANK OF CHETTINAD. LTD. v. THAMBIAH et al., NLR Vol :35, Page: 190
KUMARIHAMY v. PUNCHI MENIKA NLR Vol :38, Page: 385
LANKA ESTATES AGENCY, LTD. v. COREA NLR Vol :52, Page: 477
BASTIAM PILLAI v. ANNA FERNANDO NLR Vol :54, Page: 113
ATTORNEY-GENERAL v. M. W. SILVA NLR Vol :61, Page: 500
WIJESINGHE v. INCORPORATED COUNCIL OF LEGAL EDUCATION NLR Vol :65, Page: 364
26. Processes served on the recognized agent, effectual.

(1) Processes served on the recognized agent of a party to an action or appeal shall be as effectual as if the
same had been served on the party in person, unless the court otherwise directs.
(2) The provisions of this Ordinance for the service of process on a party to an action shall apply to the service
of process on his recognized agent.
No cases.
27.Appointment of registered attorney.
(1) The appointment of a registered attorney to make any appearance or application, or do any act as aforesaid,
shall be in writing signed by the client, and shall be filed in court; and every such appointment shall contain
an address at which service of any process which under the provisions of this Chapter may be served on a
registered attorney, instead of the party whom he represents, may be made.
(2) When so filed, it shall be in force until revoked with the leave of the court and after notice to the registered
attorney by a writing signed by the client and filed in court, or until the client dies, or until the registered
attorney dies, is removed, or suspended, or otherwise becomes incapable to act, or until all proceedings in
the action are ended and judgment satisfied so far as regards the client.
(3) No counsel shall be required to present any document empowering him to act. The Attorney-General may
appoint a registered attorney to act specially in any particular case or to act generally on behalf of the State.
SEELAWATHIE AND ANOTHER v. JAYASINGHE SLR
1985, Vol :2, Page:
266
UDESHI AND OTHERS v. MATHER SLR
1988, Vol :1, Page:
12
HAMEED v. DEEN AND OTHERS SLR
1988, Vol :2, Page:
1
MANAPERI SOMAWATHIE v. BUWANESWARI SLR
1990, Vol :1, Page:
223
JINADASA AND ANOTHER v. SAM SILVA AND OTHERS SLR
1994, Vol :1, Page:
232
SHAFEER v. DHARMAPALA SLR
1995, Vol :2, Page:
181
FERNANDO v. SYBIL FERNANDO AND 2 OTHERS SLR
1996, Vol :2, Page:
169
FERNANDO v. SYBIL FERNANDO AND OTHERS SLR
1997, Vol :3, Page:
1
DIAS v. KARAWITA SLR
1999, Vol :1, Page:
98
PAUL COIR (PVT) LTD. v. WAAS SLR
2000, Vol :2, Page:
167
DISTILLERIES COMPANY LTD. v. KARIYAWASAM AND
OTHERS
SLR
2001, Vol :3, Page:
119

WANIGARATNA v. DISSANAYAKE SLR
2002, Vol :2, Page:
331
NATIONAL INSURANCE CORPORATION v. VIOLET SLR
2002, Vol :3, Page:
337
KARUNAWATHIE V JABIR AND OTHERS SLR
2004, Vol :3, Page:
123
SlRlWARDENA AND OTHERS VS JOHN KEELS CO.
LIMITED
SLR
2005, Vol :2, Page:
89
JEEVANI INVESTMENTS VS.WIJESENA SLR
2005, Vol :3, Page:
256
ALIMA UMMA VS SIYANERIS SLR
2006, Vol :1, Page:
22
DISSANAYAKE VS HEMANTHA SLR
2006, Vol :2, Page:
12
JEEVANI INVESTMENTS (PVT) LTD. v WIJESENA
PERERA
SLR
2008, Vol :1, Page:
207
RANJITH PERERA AND ANOTHER v DHARMADASA AND
OTHERS
SLR
2008, Vol :1, Page:
377
S. P. GUNATILAKE V. S. P. SUNlL EKANAYAKE SLR
2010, Vol :2, Page:
191
LE MESURIER v. THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL NLR Vol :10, Page: 67
PERERA v. PERERA. NLR Vol :11, Page: 1
TILLEKERATNE v. WIJESINHE NLR Vol :11, Page: 270
FERNANDO et al. v. MATHEW et al. NLR Vol :15, Page: 88
TIMES OF CEYLON Co. v. LOW NLR Vol :16, Page: 434
IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION OF FERNANO,
L.S.
NELSON DE SILVA v. CASINATHAN, S. NLR Vol :55, Page: 121
KADIRGAMADAS v. SUPPIAH NLR Vol :56, Page: 172
KANDIAH v. VAIRAMUTTU NLR Vol :60, Page: 1
ATTORNEY-GENERAL v. M. W. SILVA NLR Vol :61, Page: 500
MOHIDEEN ALI v. HASSIM NLR Vol :62, Page: 457
L.J. PEIRIS & Co.LTD v. PEIRIS NLR Vol :74, Page: 261

28. Death or incapacity Of registered attorney.
If any such registered attorney as in the last preceding section is mentioned shall die, or be removed or
suspended, or otherwise become incapable to act as aforesaid, at any time before judgment, no further

proceeding shall be taken in the action against the party for whom he appeared until thirty days after notice
to appoint another registered attorney has been given to that party either personally or in such other manner
as the court directs.
HAMEED v. DEEN AND OTHERS SLR
1988, Vol :2, Page:
1
MANAPERI SOMAWATHIE v. BUWANESWARI SLR
1990, Vol :1, Page:
223
FERNANDO v. SYBIL FERNANDO AND 2 OTHERS SLR
1996, Vol :2, Page:
169
SAHEEDA UMMA AND ANOTHER v. HANIFFA AND OTHERS SLR
1999, Vol :1, Page:
150
ISEK FERNANDO v. RITA FERNANDO AND OTHERS SLR
1999, Vol :3, Page:
29
KALAWANE DHAMMADASSI THERO v. MAWELLA
DHAMMAVISUDDHI TRERO et al.,
29. Service on registered attorney.
Any process served on the registered attorney of any party or left at the office or ordinary residence of such
registered attorney, relative to an action or appeal, except where the same is for the personal appearance of
the party, shall be presumed to be duly communicated and made known to the party whom the registered
attorney represents; and, unless the court otherwise directs, shall be as effectual for all purposes in relation
to the action or appeal as if the same had been given to, or served on, the party in person.
RASIAH v. RANMANY AND OTHERS SLR
1978-79, Vol :2, Page:
88
ISEK FERNANDO v. RITA FERNANDO AND OTHERS SLR 1999, Vol :3, Page: 29
HASWl VS. JAYTISSA AND TWO OTHERS SLR 2011, Vol :1, Page: 94
URBAN COUNCIL OF DEHIWELA MOUNT LAVINIA et al., v. ANDY
SILVA
AHAMADULEBBAI v. JUBARIUMMAH NLR Vol :62, Page: 474
WICKRAMATILAKE v. DARSIN DE SILVA NLR Vol :62, Page: 97
NAGAPPAN v. LANKABARANA NLR Vol :75, Page: 488
PONNAMMA v. ARMUGAM NLR Vol :8, Page: 223

30. Agent to accept service.
Besides the recognized agents described in section 25, any person residing within the jurisdiction of the court
may be appointed an agent to accept service of process. Such appointment may be special or general, and
shall be made by an instrument in writing signed by the principal, which shall contain an address at which
such service may be made, and which, or, if the appointment be general, a duly attested copy thereof, shall
be filed in court.
No appointment under this section shall be of any force or effect for the purpose of enabling or authorizing
process to be served on an agent so appointed in any action to recover money due upon the mortgage of
immovable property.
HAROLD FERNANDO v. FONSEKA AND OTHERS SLR
1998, Vol :3, Page:
301
SALIH v HEMAWATHIE SLR
2004, Vol :3, Page:
91
30A. Agent to accept service in action upon mortgage of
immovable property.
[2,12 of 1973]
(1) The mortgagor of any immovable property may make application for the registration of the address of any
registered attorney or any person for the service of process in any action upon the mortgage. The application
shall be made substantially in the form No. 11A in the First Schedule.
(2) The address for service shall be registered in or in continuation of the folio in which is registered the
mortgage of the immovable property.
(3) Where the applicant declares in his application that a previously registered address is cancelled, the
Registrar shall make a new entry in the register and cancel the registration of the previous address.
(4) The fee for registration of the address for service or for a change of such address shall be fifty cents, with
an addition of ten cents for each folio after the first in which the address is to be registered.

[Sections 31 and 32 repealed by Law No. 20 of 1977]
No cases.
33. Regular action how to be framed.
Every regular action shall, as far as Regular action, practicable, be so framed as to afford how to be ground
for a final decision upon the subjects framed, in dispute, and so to prevent further litigation concerning them,
BROWN AND COMPANY v. STEUART INDUSTRIES LTD. SLR 1982, Vol :2, Page: 440
GANGULWITIGAMA PANNALOKA THERO v. COLOMBO
SARANANKARA THERO AND OTHERS
SLR 1983, Vol :1, Page: 332
PANNALOKA THERO v. SARANANKARA THERO SLR 1983, Vol :2, Page: 523
KEERTHIWANSA v. URBAN COUNCIL HORANA AND 3 OTHERS SLR 2001, Vol :3, Page: 252
FERNANDO et al., v. ARNOLIS NLR Vol :32, Page: 328
V. C. MAMMOO V. M. P. K. MENON NLR Vol :66, Page: 289
SELESTINA FERNANDO v. CYRIL FERNANDO AND ANOTHER NLR Vol :80, Page: 198
WIJESINGHE.M.D.I v. ASLIN NONA NLR Vol :80, Page: 213
PONNIAH v. PAYHAMY NLR Vol :8, Page: 375
34.Every action shall include whole claim.
(1) Every action shall include the Every action whole of the claim which the plaintiff is shall include entitled to
make in respect of the cause of w _e c aim-action; but a plaintiff may relinquish any portion of his claim in
order to bring the action within the jurisdiction of any court.
(2) If a plaintiff omits to sue in respect of, or intentionally relinquishes any portion of, his claim, he shall not
afterwards sue in respect of the portion so omitted or relinquished. A person entitled to more than one remedy
in respect of the same cause of action may sue for all or any of his remedies; but if he omits (except with the

leave of the court obtained before the hearing) to sue for any of such remedies, he shall not afterwards sue
for the remedy so omitted.
(3) For the purpose of this section, an obligation and a collateral security for its performance shall be deemed
to constitute but one cause of action.
Illustration
A lets a house to B at a yearly rent of Rs. 1000. The rent for the whole of the two years 1886 and 1887 is due
and unpaid. A sues B only for the rent due for one of those years. A shall not afterwards sue B for the rent
due for the other year.
BROWN AND COMPANY v. STEUART INDUSTRIES LTD. SLR 1982, Vol :2, Page: 440
GANGULWITIGAMA PANNALOKA THERO v. COLOMBO SARANANKARA
THERO AND OTHERS
SLR 1983, Vol :1, Page: 332
PANNALOKA THERO v. SARANANKARA THERO SLR 1983, Vol :2, Page: 523
ROSHAN PEIRIS v. EDIRISINGHE SLR 1986, Vol :2, Page: 147
GOVERNMENT MEDICAL OFFICERS ASSOCIATION AND ANOTHER v.
SENANAYAHE
SLR 2001, Vol :3, Page: 377
KRISHNAMOORTHY v. GANESHAN SLR 2004, Vol :1, Page: 374
PEOPLE'S BANK AND SEVEN OTHERS V. YASASlRl KASTHURIARACHCHI SLR 2010, Vol :1, Page: 227
CARD v. AROLIS NLR Vol :10, Page: 173
IBRAHIM BAAY v. ABDUL RAHIM NLR Vol :12, Page: 177
BASTIAN SILVA v. MARIANO SILVA NLR Vol :12, Page: 181
MOHAMED CASSIM v. SINNE LEBBE MARICAR NLR Vol :12, Page: 184
HOLLOWAY et al v. PERERA NLR Vol :13, Page: 198
DINGIRI MENIKA v. PUNCHI MAHATMAYA et al., NLR Vol :13, Page: 59
ALLAGASAMY v. THE KALUTARA CO., LTD. NLR Vol :14, Page: 262
KING v. JAYATILLEKE NLR Vol :15, Page: 151
PALANIAPPA CHETTY v. SAMINATHAN CHETTY et al. NLR Vol :15, Page: 161
MOHIDEEN v. PITCHE NLR Vol :17, Page: 410
PALANIAPPA v. SAMINATHAN et al. NLR Vol :17, Page: 56
BUDDHARAKITA TERUNNANSE v. GUNASEKARA NLR Vol :1, Page: 206
PALANIAPPA CHETTY v. MORTIMER NLR Vol :25, Page: 209
ANNAMALAY CHETTY v. THRONHILL NLR Vol :29, Page: 494
PANDITHAN CHETTIAR v. SINGHAPPUHAMY NLR Vol :37, Page: 310
SAIBO et al. v. ABUTHAHIR et al NLR Vol :37, Page: 319
VANDERPOORTEN v. PEIRIS NLR Vol :39, Page: 5

ODIRISHAMY v. ELARIS NLR Vol :46, Page: 68
LEMPHERS v. ANTHONY APPUHAMY NLR Vol :5, Page: 181
HERATH v. ATTORNEY GENERAL NLR Vol :60, Page: 193
EBHRAMJEE v. SIMON SINGHO NLR Vol :62, Page: 261
V. C. MAMMOO V. M. P. K. MENON NLR Vol :66, Page: 289
KANDIAH v. KANDASAMY NLR Vol :73, Page: 105
FERNANDO v. THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF ANDIAMBALAMA NLR Vol :78, Page: 4
MERCANTILE BANK LTD. v. ANVER NLR Vol :78, Page: 481
DHAMMADAJA THERO v. WIMALAJOTHI THERO NLR Vol :79, Page: 145
SELESTINA FERNANDO v. CYRIL FERNANDO AND ANOTHER NLR Vol :80, Page: 198
WIJESINGHE.M.D.I v. ASLIN NONA NLR Vol :80, Page: 213
35. Joinder of claims in actions for immovable property.
(1) In an action for the recovery of immovable property, or to obtain a declaration of title to immovable
property, no other claim, or any cause of action, shall be made unless with the leave of the court, except
(a) claims in respect of mesne profits or arrears of rent in respect of the property claimed;
(b) damages for breach of any contract under which the property or any part thereof is held; or consequential
on the trespass which constitutes the cause of action; and
(c) claims by a mortgagee to enforce any of his remedies under the mortgage. Example. A sues B to recover
land upon the allegation that the land belongs to C, and that he. A, has bought it of C. A makes C a party
defendant; but he cannot, without leave of the court, join with this claim an alternative claim for damages
against C for non-performance of his contract of sale.
In actions against executors, & c.
(2) No claim by or against an executor, administrator, or heir, as such, shall in any action be joined with
claims by or against him personally unless the last-mentioned claims are alleged to arise with reference to the
estate in respect of which the plaintiff or defendant sues or is sued as executor, administrator, or heir, or are
such as he was entitled to or liable for jointly with the deceased person whom be represents.
FERNANDO v. LAKSHMAN PERERA SLR 2000, Vol :2, Page: 413
EDIRISINGHE v. WIMALAWARDANE AND ANOTHER SLR 2002, Vol :3, Page: 343
PEIRIS AND ANOTHER vs SIRIPALA SLR 2009, Vol :1, Page: 75
MASTER DIVERS (PVT.) LTD., VS. ANUSHA KARUNARATNE AND OTHERS SLR 2010, Vol :1, Page: 403
KIRI BANDA v. SLEMA LEBBE NLR Vol :11, Page: 348

HOLLOWAY et al v. PERERA NLR Vol :13, Page: 198
ALLAGASAMY v. THE KALUTARA CO., LTD. NLR Vol :14, Page: 262
MUTTUNAYAGAM v. BRITO et al., NLR Vol :22, Page: 329
MENIKA v. MENIKA et al., NLR Vol :25, Page: 6
WYREMUTTU v. ELIYATAMBY NLR Vol :2, Page: 213
MUTTUMENIKA v. SUDUMENIKA NLR Vol :45, Page: 58
A.NAGARAJAH v. A. JEBARATNARAJAH NLR Vol :69, Page: 475
36. In other cases.
(1) Subject to the rules contained in the last section, the plaintiff may unite in the same action several causes
of action against the same defendant or the same defendants jointly, and any plaintiffs having causes of action
in which they are jointly interested against the same defendant or defendants may unite such causes of action
in the same action.
Exception: court may order separation.
But if it appears to the court that an such causes of action cannot be conveniently tried or disposed of together,
the court may, at any time before the hearing, of its own motion or on the application of any defendant, in
both cases either in the presence of, or upon notice to, the plaintiff, or at any subsequent stage of the action
if the parties agree, order separate trials of any such causes of action to be had, or make such other order as
may be necessary or expedient for the separate disposal thereof.
(2) When causes of action are united, the jurisdiction of the court as regards the action shall depend on the
amount or value of the aggregate subject-matter at the date of instituting the action, whether or not an order
has been made under the second paragraph of subsection (1).
PREMANIE SAMARASINGHE v. LEELARAJA SAMARASINGHE SLR 1990, Vol :1, Page: 31
COLGAN AND OHTERS v. UDESHI AND OTHERS SLR 1996, Vol :2, Page: 220
AMEER v. KULATUNGE SLR 1996, Vol :2, Page: 398
STASSEN EXPORTS LTD. VS. REGISTRAR OF PATENTS AND TRADE
MARKS AND OTHERS
SLR 2006, Vol :1, Page: 340
LONDON AND LANCASHIRE FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY v. P & O
COMPANY et al.,
KALUHAMY et al v. APPUHAMY et al., NLR Vol :18, Page: 87
APPUHAMY v. WALKER et al., NLR Vol :22, Page: 313
FERNANDO et al., v. FERNANDO NLR Vol :39, Page: 145

MAPALATHAN v. ELAYAVAN NLR Vol :41, Page: 115
PODIHAMY ET AL v. SEIMON APPU NLR Vol :47, Page: 503
THIRUMALAY v. KULANDAVELU NLR Vol :66, Page: 285
A.NAGARAJAH v. A. JEBARATNARAJAH NLR Vol :69, Page: 475
PONNUDURAI v. SITHAMPARAPILLAI NLR Vol :71, Page: 315
WERAGAMA v. BANDARA NLR Vol :77, Page: 289
37. Application by defendant in such cases.
Any defendant alleging that the plaintiff has united in the same action several causes of action, which cannot
be conveniently disposed of in one action, may at any time before the hearing apply to the court for an order
confining the action to such of the causes of action as may be conveniently disposed of in one action.
RODRIGO VS. THE FINANCE CO. LTD AND ANOTHER SLR 2005, Vol :2, Page: 285
MAPALATHAN v. ELAYAVAN NLR Vol :41, Page: 115
38. Order of court thereon.
(1) If, on the hearing of such application, it appears to the court that the causes of action are such as cannot
all be conveniently disposed of in one action, the court may order any of such causes of action to be excluded,
and may direct the plaint to be amended accordingly, and may make such order as to costs as may be just.
(2) Every amendment made under this section shall be attested by the signature of the Judge.
COLOMBO SHIPPING CO. LTD. v. CHIRAYU CLOTHING (PVT)
LTD.
SLR 1995, Vol :2, Page: 97

PERERA v GEEKIYANA SLR
2007, Vol :1, Page:
202
SOMALOKA TERUNNANSE v. SOMALANKARA TERUNNANSE et al,. NLR Vol :3, Page: 380
LEBBE v. SANDANAM NLR Vol :64, Page: 461
39. Regular action to commence by plaint.
[6,20 of 1977]
[3,79 of 1988]
Every action of regular procedure shall be instituted by presenting a duly stamped written plaint to the court,
or to such officer as the court shall appoint in that behalf. The plaint shall be accompanied by such number of
summonses in Form No, 16 in the First Schedule as there are defendants, and a precept in Form" No. 17 of
the said Schedule.
WIGNESWAREN v. THAMBIPILLAI SLR 1983, Vol :1, Page: 325
WIJERATNE AND ANOTHER v. WEERATUNGA SLR 1999, Vol :1, Page: 332
YOUSOOF MOHAMED AND ANOTHER v. INDIAN OVERSEAS
BANK
SLR 1999, Vol :3, Page: 278
Requisites of Plaint
[7,20 of 1977]
40. The plaint shall be distinctly written upon good and suitable paper, and shall plaint contain the following
particulars.
(a) the name of the court and date of filing the plaint;
(b) the name, description, and place of residence of the plaintiff;
(c) the name, description, and the place of residence of the defendant so far as the same can be ascertained;
(d) a plain and concise statement of the circumstances constituting each cause of action, and where and when
it arose. Such statement shall be set forth in duly numbered paragraphs; and where two or more causes of
action are set out, the statement of the circumstances constituting each cause of action must be separate,
and numbered;
(e) a demand of the relief which the plaintiff claims; and
(f) if the plaintiff has allowed a set-off or relinquished a portion of his claim, the amount so allowed or
relinquished,

If the plaintiff seeks the recovery of money, the plaint must state the precise amount, so far as the case
admits. In an action for a specific chattel, or to establish, recover, or enforce any right, status, or privilege,
or for mesne profits, or for the amount which will be found due to the plaintiff on taking unsettled accounts
between him and the defendant, the plaint need only state approximately the value of the chattel, right, status,
or privilege, or the amount sued for.
HAMEED ALIAS ABDUL RAHMAN v. WEERASINGHE AND OTHERS SLR 1989, Vol :1, Page: 217
GUNASENA v. KANDAGE AND OTHERS SLR 1997, Vol :3, Page: 393
ANOTHER
SLR 1998, Vol :3, Page: 180
ANTHONY v. WEERASINGHE SLR 2000, Vol :2, Page: 212
NARENDRA v. SEYLAN MERCHANT BANK LTD. AND OTHERS SLR 2003, Vol :2, Page: 1
LESLIE SlLVA VS PERERA SLR 2005, Vol :2, Page: 184
ATUKORALE v. SAMYNATHAN NLR Vol :41, Page: 165
WIJEWARDENE v. LENORA NLR Vol :60, Page: 457
SUBRAMANIAN v. SEENIAR NLR Vol :61, Page: 433
K.THIAGARAJAH v. P.KARTHIGESU NLR Vol :69, Page: 73
MUNICIPAL COUNCIL OF JAFFNA v. DODWELL & Co. LTD. NLR Vol :74, Page: 25
SURIAN PULLE et al. v. SILVA et al., NLR Vol :9, Page: 80

786 upto sec 40 pdf (6) (1)

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Similar to 786 upto sec 40 pdf (6) (1)

Similar to 786 upto sec 40 pdf (6) (1) (20)

More from awasalam

More from awasalam (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

786 upto sec 40 pdf (6) (1)