Sumanadewa and Another v. Sediris and Another – sllr 1990 volume 1 page 027

In the matter of Sumanadewa and Another v. Sediris and Another, the court addressed the correction of an apparent error in an interlocutory judgment that had misidentified the parentage of the 7th and 8th defendants. It was held that a judicial correction was warranted under sections 839 and 189 of the Civil Procedure Code to rectify the misstatement that the defendants were children of Emina, rather than Anjina. The principle reaffirmed was that courts possess inherent authority to amend accidental slips, supported by precedents such as Thambipillai v. Muthucumaraswamy. Emphasis was placed on ensuring the record accurately reflects the evidence, and costs were awarded to the applicants benefiting from the correction.

Wijeyaratne J. — The findings established that evidence at trial concl