Navaratnasingham v. Arumugam and Another – sllr 1980 volume 2 page 001

In NAVARATNASINGHAM v. ARUMUGAM AND ANOTHER, the court considered whether the petitioner’s application for revision, involving orders of the Magistrate’s Court in Jaffna, complied with the procedural requirements of Rule 46 of the Supreme Court Rules and whether objections to jurisdiction were valid given the stage at which they were raised. It was determined that the petitioner failed to submit a complete record of proceedings—including all relevant pleadings, statements, evidence, and orders—as required under Rule 46, rendering the application procedurally deficient. Additionally, it was established that jurisdictional objections must be raised at the earliest opportunity, and failure to do so during the initial proceedings constituted a waiver of such objections. The application for rev