IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE DEMOCRATIC SOCIALIST REPUBLIC OF SRI LANKA In the matter of an Appeal under Section 5(C)1 of the High Court of the Provinces (Special Provisions) Act No. 19 of 1990 as amended by Act No.54 of 2006.

1. Iyathurai Kulenthiran

5252 Rue L’armoise Pierrefonds QC H8Z 0A6 Montreal, Canada through his power of attorney holder Kumunthan Vijitha of Markandu Road, Mulangavil.

2. Rathinam Kumunthan

3. wife Vijitha Both of Markandu Road, Mulangavil Plaintiffs Vs.

S.C. Appeal No.148/2018 S.C./HCCA/ LA No. .567/2016 H.C. Northern Province,Jaffna (Civil Appellate) No.Rev. 65/2016 D.C.Mallakam No.Mis/164/2012 Iyathurai Perinpanayagam Moolai South, Chulipuram Presently of Chettier Eating House, Pillaiyar Kovilady, Mulangavil.

Defendant AND Iyathurai Perinpanayagam Moolai South, Chulipuram Presently of Chettier Eating House,Pillaiyar Kovilady, Mulangavil.

Defendant-Petitioner Vs.

1. Iyathurai Kulenthiran

5252 Rue L’armoise Pierrefonds QC H8Z 0A6 Montreal, Canada through his power of attorney holder Kumunthan Vijitha of Markandu Road, Mulangavil.

2. Rathinam Kumunthan

3. Wife Vijitha Both of Markandu Road, Mulangavil Plaintiff-Respondents AND NOW BETWEEN

1. Iyathurai Kulenthiran

5252 Rue L’armoise Pierrefonds QC H8Z 0A6 Montreal, Canada through his power of attorney holder Kumunthan Vijitha of Markandu Road, Mulangavil.

2. Rathinam Kumunthan

3. wife Vijitha Both of Markandu Road, Mulangavil Plaintiff-Respondent-

Appellants Vs.

1. Iyathurai Perinpanaagam Moolai South, Chulipuram Presently of Chettier Eating House, Pillaiyar Kovilady, Mulangavil.

Defendant-Petitioner-

Respondent

2. Selvarasa Selvarooban No.31, Kuruban Road, Mulankavil, Killinochchi Added-Respondent BEFORE : E.A.G.R. AMARASEKARA, J.

A.H.M.D. NAWAZ, J.

ACHALA WENGAPPULI, J.

COUNSEL : Ms. Shakthiyaraji K. for the Plaintiff-

Respondent-Appellant K.V.S. Ganesharajan with S. Rague & K.

Nasikethan for the Defendant-Petitioner-

Respondent.

V. Puvitharan P.C. for the Added-Respondent ARGUED ON : 22^nd February, 2022 ORDER ON : 06th April, 2023 *********

ACHALA WENGAPPULI, J.

The Added-Respondent, one Selvarasa Selvarooban, was named and added as a party to the instant appeal by the Plaintiff-Respondent- Appellants by way of an amended petition tendered to this Court, supported by an affidavit along with an amended caption. This amendment was made by the Plaintiff-Respondent-Appellants only after this Court had granted leave on their original petition. Upon being noticed by this Court, the Added -Respondent was represented by the learned President’s Counsel, who then moved his client be discharged from these proceedings. In his submissions, learned President’s Counsel took up the position that the Added-Respondent was neither a party to the action before the original Court instituted by the Plaintiff- Respondent-Appellants, nor to the proceedings before the Civil Appellate High Court holden in Jaffna, initiated by the Defendant- Petitioner-Respondent, in invoking its revisionary jurisdiction. In these circumstances, it was contended by the Counsel that the Added- Respondent is not bound by either of the two Judgments referred to in the instant appeal. The Plaintiff-Respondent-Appellants have resisted the said application.

The three Plaintiff-Respondent-Appellants have instituted the instant action in 2012, before the District Court of Mallakam, regarding a dispute over the ownership of a passenger bus bearing number NPNA 0226. In their prayer to the Plaint, the Plaintiff-Respondent-Appellants have sought a declaration against the Defendant-Petitioner-Respondent, who was the registered owner of the said passenger bus at that point of time, that the said passenger bus is held by him “in trust and benefit” of the Plaintiff-Respondent-Appellants. They also sought the following reliefs in their prayer to the Plaint: -

i. an order of Court on the Defendant-Petitioner-Respondent to “consent the Route Permit” in favour of the 2nd Plaintiff-

Respondent-Appellant, ii. an order of Court to handover the sa