Ahangamage Malani vs. Thilakarathna Arachchige Ubayasena – CA/RII/58/2023-2024

The case between Ahangamage Malani (petitioner) and Thilakarathna Arachchige Ubayasena (and related parties) addressed the issue of the availability and scope of restitutio in integrum and revision under Article 138 of the Constitution, in the context of property rights, execution of writs, and alleged procedural irregularities. It was held that the disputed property, asserted to have been acquired by the petitioner’s husband, was not liable to seizure in execution proceedings. The findings reaffirmed the principle that restitutio in integrum remains a broad remedial mechanism, accessible even in the absence of direct appeals or explicit statutory provision, and applicable where procedural or substantive inequities are established. This decision relied on section 241 of the Civil Procedure