Sheila Seneviratne v. Shereen Dharmaratne – sllr 1997 volume 1 page 076

In the case between Sheila Seneviratne (Plaintiff) and Shereen Dharmaratne (Defendant), the court addressed whether an ex parte decree based solely on hearsay evidence—specifically, the testimony of the plaintiff’s sister—could constitute a valid basis for judgment under the Civil Procedure Code and the Evidence Ordinance. The court held that such a decree, entered without direct oral evidence from a competent witness, was invalid. This decision reaffirmed the principle that substantive procedural safeguards and rules of admissibility under Section 60 of the Evidence Ordinance require direct evidence to prove a fact in issue. Reliance on hearsay evidence in ex parte proceedings was deemed inadequate for a lawful decree, and the case was remitted for a full inter partes trial. The judgment