Uragoda vs Jayasinghe and Others – sllr 2004 volume 1 page 108

In the case between the plaintiff (an individual seeking medical treatment, name undisclosed) and the defendants—1st defendant Dr. Uragoda and the 2nd to 6th defendants operating as partners at the “Glass House” diagnostic services—the court addressed the procedural issue of whether a challenge to misjoinder of defendants and causes of action could be entertained when not raised at the earliest opportunity, as required by the Civil Procedure Code. It was held that objections regarding misjoinder must be made promptly in accordance with sections 22 and 91 of the Civil Procedure Code, and failure to do so constitutes a waiver of such objection. The claim of misjoinder was dismissed, reinforcing the principle that proceedings should not be disposed of on technical procedural grounds when subs