Pushpakanthi vs. Amaratunga and Others – sllr 2009 volume 2 page 329

Brief
In the case between Amaratunga and others (Plaintiff–Respondent) and 2nd Defendant–Petitioner, the court addressed whether an order made by the trial judge directing steps under Section 18(2) or Section 18(3) of the Partition Law, which effectively permitted conversion of a land action concerning one property into another by amendment of pleadings, could be properly challenged by way of revision. It was determined that an action cannot be converted from one land to another merely by amendment of pleadings, and the trial judge had provided reasonable procedural options. The application for revision was dismissed due to the petitioner’s significant delay and absence of exceptional circumstances, reinforcing the principle that revisionary intervention requires clear justification. Refer