Udapola Dahanayakage Siriwardena v. Dahanayakage alias Dasanayaka Mudiyanselage Gunawathie – CA REVISION APPLICATION NO: 144/2003-2011

In the case between Dahanayakage alias Dasanayaka, Mudiyanselage Gunawathie and others (Plaintiffs) versus Dahankge alias Dasanayaka Mudiyanselage Punchi Mahathmaya and others (Defendants), with an intervening petitioner Udapola Dahanayakage Siriwardena, the court addressed whether the omission of a claimed owner as a party to a partition action, and the consequent lack of notice, justifies revising or vacating the partition judgment and interlocutory decree. It was held that procedural deficiencies in notice and party joinder, in the absence of fraud or prejudice, do not warrant revision under the Partition Act, reaffirming the principle that proper remedy lies in instituting a separate action for damages where a partition decree is claimed to be prejudicial. The decision was based on sta