Senarath Gedara Somadasa v. H.M. Razik alias Thajjik and Abdul Razak Mohomad Ruzdy – CA 539/97-2018

In the case between Senarath Gedara Somadasa (Plaintiff-Appellant-Petitioner) and Abdul Razak Mohomad Ruzdy (Substituted Defendant-Respondent-Respondent), the court addressed the issue of whether the Plaintiff should be permitted to admit fresh evidence at the appellate stage, specifically several deeds and documents concerning title to disputed property, including the procedural validity of affidavits supporting the application. It was held that the application to lead fresh evidence failed to satisfy the legal requirements for admission, as the Plaintiff did not demonstrate due diligence in obtaining and presenting the documents at trial, with only one document potentially meeting the lack of earlier availability criterion but failing on other requirements. The court reaffirmed the princ