Surangi vs Rodrigo – sllr 2003 volume 3 page 035

In the case between SURANGI (Plaintiff) and RODRIGO (Defendant), the court addressed whether reliefs not explicitly sought in the plaint, particularly permanent alimony framed as damages, could be granted. It was determined that a court lacks jurisdiction to grant relief not claimed in the pleadings, reaffirming the procedural principle that the specificity of reliefs in pleadings is essential. Reliance was placed on relevant statutes and case law, particularly provisions of the Civil Procedure Code, emphasizing that the precise nature of relief must be stated and additional issues inconsistent with pleadings cannot alter this principle.

Amaratunga J. — Upon review of the plaintiff’s claims and the pleadings, it was found that the request for damages described as permanent alimony was