SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(SRI)(SC) 9880

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE DEMOCRATIC SOCIALIST REPUBLIC OF SRI LANKA.

In the matter of an Appeal under and in terms of Section 5C of the High Court of the Provinces (Special Provisions) (Amendment) Act No. 54 of 2006.

Athauda Arachchige Patrine Dilrukshi Dias Wickremasinghe, No. 377/2, Thalawathugoda Road, Hokandara South.

Plaintiff S.C. Appeal No.88/2024 SC/HCCA/LA No. 144/2022 Vs.

HCCA Case No.WP/HCCA/Col/137/22(LA)

D.C. Colombo Case No.DMR 3675/21.

01. Mr. Dharmasena Dissanayake, No.21/1, Dr. Sydney Premithirathne Mawatha, Seeduwa.

02. Dr. Prathap Ramanujam, No.12/2, Vihara Mawatha, Kolonnawa.

03. Mrs. V. Jegarajasingam, Kandy Road, Krishnapuram 10, Trincomalee.

04. Mr. G.S.A. de Silva, No. D ‰ , Charles Apartments, De Silva Cross Road, Kalubowila.

05. Mr. S. Ranugge, No.34A, Wijaya Road, Kolonnawa.

06. Mr. D. Laksiri Mendis, No.7A, Cambridge Place, Colombo 07.

07. Mr. Sarath Jayathileka, No.117/30, Ananda Rajakaruna Mawatha, Colombo 10.

08. Mrs. Sudharma Karunarathna, No. 93/1, Elhena Road, Maharagama.

Defendants AND Dr. Prathap Ramanujam, No.12/2, Vihara Mawatha, Kolonnawa.

2nd Defendant-Petitioner Vs.

Athauda Arachchige Patrine Dilrukshi Dias Wickremasinghe, No. 372/2, Thalawathugoda Road, Hokandara South.

Plaintiff-Respondent

01. Mr. Dharmasena Dissanayake, No.21/1, Dr. Sydney Premithirathne Mawatha, Seeduwa.

03. Mrs. V. Jegarajasingam, Kandy Road, Krishnapuram 10, Trincomalee.

04. Mr. G.S.A. de Silva, No. D ‰ , Charles Apartments, De Silva Cross Road, Kalubowila.

05. Mr. S. Ranugge, No.34A, Wijaya Road, Kolonnawa.

06. Mr. D. Laksiri Mendis, No.7A, Cambridge Place, Colombo 07.

07. Mr. Sarath Jayathileka, No.117/30, Ananda Rajakaruna Mawatha, Colombo 10.

08. Mrs. Sudharma Karunarathna, No. 93/1, Elhena Road, Maharagama.

Defendant-Respondents AND NOW Dr. Prathap Ramanujam, No.12/2, Vihara Mawatha, Kolonnawa.

2nd Defendant-Petitioner-Appellant Vs.

Athauda Arachchige Patrine Dilrukshi Dias Wickremasinghe, No. 372/2, Thalawathugoda Road, Hokandara South.

Plaintiff-Respondent-Respondent

01. Mr. Dharmasena Dissanayake, No.21/1, Dr. Sydney Premathirathne Mawatha, Seeduwa.

03. Mrs. V. Jegarajasingam, Kandy Road, Krishnapuram 10, Trincomalee.

Presently of No.1/3, 265/115, Torrington Hague Residencies, Torrington Avenue, Colombo 05

04. Mr. G.S.A. de Silva, No. D ‰ , Charles Apartments, De Silva Cross Road, Kalubowila.

Presently of 4G, 189 Residencies, Baseline Road, Colombo 09.

05. Mr. S. Ranugge, No.34A, Wijaya Road, Kolonnawa.

06. Mr. D. Laksiri Mendis, No.7A, Cambridge Place, Colombo 07.

Presently of ;

B/10/4, Empire Residencies, 51, Braybrooke Place Colombo 02.

07. Mr. Sarath Jayathileka, No.117/30, Ananda Rajakaruna Mawatha, Colombo 10.

08. Mrs. Sudharma Karunarathna, No. 93/1, Elhena Road, Maharagama.

Defendant-Respondent-

Respondents BEFORE : HON. E.A.G.R. AMARASEKARA, J.

HON. ACHALA WENGAPPULI, J.

HON. MAHINDA SAMAYAWARDHENA, J.

COUNSEL : Chamantha Weerakoon Unamboowe, PC with Tersha Nanayakkara Instructed by Chithra Jayasinghe for the 2nd Defendant-Petitioner-

Appellant.

Nerin Pulle. PC ASG with Ishara Madarasinghe, SC for the 1st, 3rd, 4th and 8th Respondent-

Respondent-Respondents.

Romesh de Silva, PC with Thishya Weragoda instructed by Sanath Wijewardane for the Plaintiff-Respondent-Respondent.

Uditha Egalahewa PC with Tharushi Buddhadasa instructed by H. Chandrakumara de Silva for the

5th Defendant-Respondent-Respondent.

Dr. Sunil F.A. Cooray instructed by Tissa Bandara for the 6th Defendant-Respondent-Respondent.

ARGUED ON : 11th October, 2024 DECIDED ON : 04th June. 2025 HON. ACHALA WENGAPPULI, J.

These two appeals stem from an action, instituted by the Plaintiff in the District Court of Colombo (Case No. DMR/3675/2021) on 21.09.2021, against the 1st to 8th Defendants. In that action, the Plaintiff claimed damages in a sum of Rs. 1,000,000,000.00, individually as well as jointly from the Defendants. The Plaint of the Plaintiff was presented to the District Court on the basis that the Defendants, while functioning as members of the Public Service Commission (hereina

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top