Mirrinnege Philippo Appuhamy vs Opposing Creditor – clr volume 1 page 029_1

In the case between the insolvent appellant and the opposing creditor respondent, the court addressed the validity of an appeal from the District Court’s order in insolvency proceedings where the required security for appeal costs had not been furnished. It was held that compliance with Section 756 of the Civil Procedure Code is mandatory, and in the absence of such security, the appeal cannot be maintained. This determination reaffirmed the principle that statutory requirements governing appeals must be strictly observed, emphasizing that procedural defaults concerning security for costs under the relevant statute render an appeal incompetent.

Clarence A.C.J. —
It was determined that the appeal was not competent due to the absence of security for costs as required by Section 756 of th