Walpitagamage Samie v. Winifrida Nanayakkara and Shelton Nanayakkara – 194/99 F -1999

In the case between Thanthirige Mureen Perera (substituted for Walpitagamage Samie) and Winifrida Nanayakkara and Shelton Nanayakkara, the court addressed the legal issue of whether a party dispossessed pursuant to an ex parte decree—subsequently set aside as void—may be restored to possession, and whether the absence of an initial order for re-possession or failure to appeal on that particular point precludes such restoration. It was held that a court’s inherent powers under Section 839 of the Civil Procedure Code extend to restoring the status quo ante when a party has been wrongfully dispossessed in consequence of an invalid decree, regardless of prior omissions or failures to appeal. The principle that courts must remedy the consequences of orders subsequently found to be void was reaf