Dayananda v. Thalwatte – sllr 2001 volume 2 page 073

In the case between Dayananda (Petitioner) and Thalwatte (Respondent), the court addressed whether an application for revision under Article 138 of the Primary Courts Procedure Act could be combined with an application for prerogative writs under Article 140 of the Constitution, and whether failure to specify the precise writ sought invalidated the application. The holding established that combining distinct legal remedies in a single application is not permitted and that lack of specificity regarding the relief sought is a fatal procedural defect. The principle reaffirmed is that each remedy—revision and prerogative writ—requires separate pleadings and specifically stated grounds. This determination was based on statutory interpretation and existing precedents, clarifying procedural requi