P.N. Priyanka Sarogini vs P.N. Saman Pushpa Kumara – CA PHC 87/2007-2013

The case between P.N. Priyanka Sarogini (Appellant) and P.N. Saman Pushpa Kumara (Respondent) addressed the issue of whether an appeal should proceed in the face of the appellant’s non-compliance with a directive to deposit brief fees. It was held that the appeal is to be rejected due to the appellant’s failure to adhere to the notified procedural requirement regarding payment of brief fees, reaffirming the principle that compliance with court-ordered procedural prerequisites is mandatory for the maintenance of appeals. The holding relied on procedural regulations governing appellate practice, emphasizing that non-compliance with such directives results in summary rejection of the appeal.

A.W.A. Salam J. — Having established that notices were served on the appellant directing the deposit