Garusinhage Mallika vs K.L. Piyadasa – CA 1401/99-2013

In the case between Garusinhage Mallika (Plaintiff/Appellant) and K.L. Piyadasa (Defendant/Respondent), the court addressed whether the appellant’s appeal should proceed in light of repeated non-compliance with procedural directions, specifically concerning the deposit of brief fees and issues with service of notice. It was held that the appeal must be rejected due to the appellant’s failure to comply with Rule 13(b) of the 1978 Court of Appeal Rules, reaffirming the principle that strict procedural compliance is required for the prosecution of appeals. The decision relied on the said Rule 13(b) and relevant procedural requirements, emphasizing that neglecting mandatory steps results in forfeiture of the right to pursue the appeal.

A.W.A. Salam J. — The findings established that notices