Fahul Hameed Rafeeth Palawiya vs OIC, Police Station, Puttalam – CA PHC 152/2006-2013

In the case between Fahul Hameed Rafeeth (Appellant) and the Officer-in-Charge (OIC), Police Station, Puttalam (Respondent), the court addressed whether the appeal could proceed in light of the appellant’s failure to deposit the required brief fees. It was determined that notice for the deposit of such fees had been issued and, as the notice was not returned undelivered, receipt was presumed. Upon the appellant’s failure to deposit the brief fees, the appeal was ordered to stand rejected. The decision reinforced the principle that compliance with court-ordered procedural requirements, such as the payment of brief fees, is necessary for an appeal to proceed. The holding relied upon procedural rules governing appellate practice and highlighted the consequences of non-compliance with such dir