Ven. Aludeniye Subodhi Thero vs. Ven. Kotapola Amarakiththi Thero et al. – SC APPEAL 144/2019-2023

In the case between Ven. Aludeniye Subodhi Thero and Ven. Kotapola Amarakiththi Thero (and associated temple administrative parties), the court addressed whether the petitioner could be substituted in place of the deceased 4th Defendant, Ven. Munhene Meththarama Thero, under Section 760A of the Civil Procedure Code and Rule 38 of the Supreme Court Rules. It was held that substitution is a procedural mechanism to ensure continuity of appeals and does not confer or determine substantive rights regarding the disputed appointment as Viharadhipathi. The principle reaffirmed was that substitution proceedings should not be conflated with the adjudication of underlying rights to appointment. Reliance was placed on the construction of applicable statutes and rules, with emphasis on the distinction