Karous v. Dharmarathana Thero And Others – sllr 2006 volume 2 page 320

In the case between Karous (Plaintiff) and Dharmarathana Thero and Others (Defendants), the court examined the maintainability of an intervenient-petitioner’s application to be added as a party under section 18 of the Civil Procedure Code. It was held that the application was not maintainable, as the petitioner failed to pursue the proper statutory remedy by way of leave to appeal under section 754(2) and instead improperly sought relief in revision. The court reinforced the principle that the burden of proving entitlement to be added as a party lies with the applicant, not with the respondent to negate. Statutory analysis and evaluation of documentary evidence, particularly inconsistencies within the petitioner’s case, guided the dismissal of the revision application. This decision unders