Paramanathan and Another v. Kodituwakku Arachchi – sllr 1994 volume 2 page 284

In Kodituwakku Arachchi (landlord) v. Paramananthan and Another (tenants), the court addressed whether a tenant subject to an execution pending appeal order could challenge the order when written reasons for such execution were absent from the record. It was held that when the record, as evinced by the “vide proceedings” entry, lacked the required written reasoning, the omission could not be attributed to the tenant’s fault. The case reaffirmed that procedural compliance, including the requirement for recorded reasons under the Civil Procedure Code and Supreme Court (Appeal) Rules, is fundamental to the legitimacy of execution pending appeal. Relying on statutory provisions including sections 752(2), 753, 755(4), 756(5)-(7), 761, 763(2) of the Civil Procedure Code and Rule 46 of the Suprem