IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE DEMOCRATIC SOCIALIST REPUBLIC OF SRI LANKA In the matter of an application for mandates in the nature of writs of Certiorari and Mandamus under Article 140 of the Constitution of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka.

Court of Appeal Case No:

CA/Writ/264/2018 Abeykoon Ralalage Pushpalatha Ranjanie No. 44/3/3C Sangabo Mawatha Keselwatte Panadura Petitioner -Vs-

1. Jagath Dias Director General Pensions Department of Pensions Maligawatte Colombo 10

2. P. Chandani Denagama Director Department of Pensions Maligawatte Colombo 10

3. Pathmasiri Jayamanna The Secretary The Secretary to the Ministry of Public Administration

4. Attorney General Attorney General’s Department Colombo

12 Respondents Before: Hon. D.N. Samarakoon, J.

Counsel: Muditha Liyanagedara for the Petitioner.

Manohara Jayasinghe D. S. G. for 01 to 04 respondents Lihini Fernando and Anjalie Rambukwella for the 05th Respondent Supported on: 19.02.2024 Written submission tendered on: 11.03.2024 by the Petitioner.

26.02.2024 by the 01st to 04th Respondents

07.03.2024 by the 05th respondent Decided on: 22.03.2024 Hon. D. N. Samarakoon J., I heard the arguments in this matter on 22^nd January 2024.

When Mr. Manohara Jayasinghe, learned Deputy Solicitor General for 01st to 04th respondents mentioned the name Watutantrige Ramyapala de Alwis I said that I remember that name. The learned D. S. G., saying that he would show how I remembered that name referred to the judgment in C. A. RII 20 2018 dated 22.03.2021, that arose from the divorce action No. 2453 D in the District Court of Panadura, which judgment had been authoured by me with the concurrence of Justice Pradeep Kirthisinghe.

The defendant petitioner in that case, Kulupaga Badalge Wimalawathie had instituted that application against Abeykoonralalage Pushpalatha Ranjani, the added defendant in the divorce action.

I have said, among other things, as follows in that judgment, “The position of the defendant is that her late husband and the said Pushpalatha were having an adulterous affair. There is P.11 which is a birth certificate of a child born on 19.05.2004 i.e. before the marriage of Ramyapala De Alwis with the defendant is dissolved where Pushpalatha alias Pushpalatha Ranjani has declared her race as “Ceylon moor.” It is because Pushpalatha herself was having another marriage as per the defendant. P.10(a) and P10 (b) are birth certificates of children born within the legal wedlock of Pushpalatha Ranjani with one Widanalage Hamitha Sarath Fernando dated 12.01.1997 and 19.08.1998 in which birth certificates the race of Pushpalatha Ranjani is referred to as “Sinhalese”.

None of the documents have been challenged or disputed for the added defendant at the oral hearing. Hence they are acceptable. P.11 shows that Ramyapala De Alwis and Pushpalatha Ranjani were having an adulterous affaire while both were married to third parties. The entry in P.11 as to the race of the mother being given as “Ceylon moor” is false because Pushpalatha Ranjani has given her race as “Sinhalese” in P.10(a) and P.10(b).

It shows that in order to avoid being charged with the offence of bigamy she has given a false race in P.11. The other party to this fraud was Ramyapala De Alwis. Hence it is very likely that Ramyapala De Alwis took fraudulent action in the divorce case not to serve summons and decree nisi to the defendant.”

Hence, I have set aside the judgment in the divorce case. As Ramyapala was dead, there was no possibility of recommencing that action. At the conclusion I have said, “It is further declared that the marriage between Ramyapala de Alwis and the defendant was valid until Ramyapala de Alwis died and hence the defendant is the lawful widow of Ramyapala de Alwis who is entitled to among other things a widow would usually be entitled to the pension benefits of Ramyapala de Alwis.”

The present application is C. A. Writ 264/2018.

The petitioner and respondents are as follows, Petitioner – Abeykoon Ralalage Pushpalath