Navaroch v. Shrikanthan and Others – sllr 1997 volume 1 page 286

In the case between S. K. K. Appuhamy and others (plaintiff‑respondents) and S. Kiribanda (defendant‑petitioner), the court addressed whether a judgment delivered on 27.3.1996 was ex parte or interpartes, and consequently, whether such a judgment and related orders could be set aside or revised. It was held that the judgment, having been entered after proceedings at which both parties’ Attorneys‑at‑Law were present, was interpartes and thus not subject to setting aside as an ex parte judgment. The principle reaffirmed was that once a court has delivered and perfected its judgment (becoming functus officio), it cannot alter or set aside its own orders except on appeal, unless special circumstances are demonstrated. The findings established that the proper remedy for the defendant‑petitioner