U. A. Rodrigo et al. vs H. R. Mutuweera et al. – CA 671/96 F -2011

In the case between U. A. Rodrigo and others (Plaintiffs) and K. R. T. Peiris, Nilhan Peiris, Darshini Weeraratne, among others (Defendants), the court addressed the issue of whether an application by the Defendant-Appellant-Petitioner to re-list appeal C.A. 671/96(F), which had previously been rejected for want of appearance and non-compliance with procedural requirements, should be allowed. It was determined that the application should be dismissed due to the absence of sufficient cause for the delay and because proper notice had been served via the registered attorney, reaffirming the principle that service on an attorney is presumed to be good service on the client. The decision relied on authorities including Section 114(d) of the Evidence Ordinance and Section 29 of the Civil Procedu