Kumara and Another vs. Kanthi and Others – sllr 2021 volume 1 page 398

In the case between Kumara and Another (Plaintiffs) and Kanthi and Others (Defendants), the court addressed whether the omission of the plan number in the plaint’s schedule justified dismissal of the plaintiffs’ action, given that the identity of the disputed land (corpus) was mutually admitted under section 58 of the Evidence Ordinance. The court determined that once facts are admitted by both parties, independent proof is unnecessary unless the court otherwise directs, emphasizing that dismissal on a technicality undermines the adversarial system’s core function of resolving substantive disputes. Prior decisions from the District Court and High Court that dismissed the claim were set aside. The principle reaffirmed is that litigation should be decided on its merits, without undue relianc