Wijesinghe v. Karunadasa – sllr 1987 volume 2 page 179

In the case between Plaintiff Wijesinghe and Defendant Karunadasa, the court addressed whether proposed amendments to the original plaint—introducing alternative causes of action based on unjust enrichment and laesio enormis—fundamentally altered the nature of the suit. The determination was made that the amendments merely clarified and amplified issues already present in the pleadings, without changing the action’s substance or foundation. Relying on sections 46(2) and 93 of the Civil Procedure Code and precedents such as Senanayake v. Anthonisz and Mackinnon Mackenzie & Co. v. Grindlays Bank Ltd., it was underscored that late amendments may be permitted if they do not alter the fundamental basis of the action. The District Judge’s order permitting the amendments was affirmed, and the app