Hameed and Another v. Dharmasiri and Others – sllr 1990 volume 1 page 410

In the case between the plaintiffs–petitioners, including A. K. Premadasa, P.C., and the defendants, originally P. G. Mendis Appuhamy (deceased) and Sunil Mallikarachchi, the court addressed the issue of the proper substitution of a deceased defendant’s legal representative under sections 394(2), 398(1), and 405 of the Civil Procedure Code. The court held that sufficient prima facie evidence existed to support the substitution of P. G. Dharmasiri, son of the deceased, as the legal representative, thereby setting aside the earlier rejection of substitution and awarding costs to the plaintiffs. This decision reaffirmed the principle that a “legal representative” encompasses an executor de son tort, with legal proceedings only maintained where substitution aligns with statutory requirements.