Warakapitiya Gamagedara Lalitha Kumarihamy Wijewardana v. Pihillalandegedara Gunaratne – CA 1032/2000-2013

In the case between Warakapitiya Gamagedara Lalitha Kumarihamy Wijewardana (Plaintiff-Respondent) and Pihillalandegedara Gunaratne (1st Defendant-Appellant), the court addressed the validity of an Additional District Judge’s order refusing to set aside an ex-parte decree against the 1st Defendant-Appellant, despite the presence of the Appellant’s attorney-at-law at the trial. The findings determined that, under the Civil Procedure Code and established precedent, the presence of counsel constituted sufficient representation, so proceedings should have been considered inter partes and not ex-parte. Section 87(3) of the Civil Procedure Code was thus found inapplicable for setting aside the decree, affirming that the proper remedy was by appeal. This determination reaffirmed the principle that