Keerthiwansa v. Urban Council Horana and 3 Others – sllr 2001 volume 3 page 252

In the case between the main petitioner (a landowner) and the Urban Council of Horana (with several adjacent residents as intervenient petitioners), the court addressed the validity and scope of non-notarial documents (R2 and X1C) regarding the widening of a roadway, and whether all landowners who previously consented to the change should be joined as necessary parties pursuant to Section 18(1) of the Civil Procedure Code. It was held that all signatories to the documents affecting the road must be joined in the litigation, affirming that a comprehensive resolution requires the presence of all affected parties. The court relied on precedents such as Banda v. Dharmaratne and Arumugam Coomaraswamy v. Andiris Appuhamy, emphasizing the principle that Section 18(1) CPC should be broadly constru