Premawathie and Others vs. Thilakaratne and Others – sllr 2021 volume 3 page 382

In the case between the Plaintiff-Appellant-Respondent (initiator of the partition action) and the Defendant Petitioners (including the 2nd, 4B, 5A, 8th to 12th, 14th, 15th, 18th to 20th Defendants), the court addressed whether a leave to appeal application was fatally defective due to the omission of necessary substituted parties as respondents, specifically the 7th, 23rd, and 24th Defendants, in contravention of Supreme Court Rules 28(2) and 28(5). The court determined that such omissions in the application caption critically undermined the proper service of notices and the court’s jurisdiction over affected parties. The application was dismissed, reaffirming that non-compliance with procedural rules relating to party substitution can invalidate appellate proceedings, with reliance place