Udapola Dahanakage Samarasinghe vs Kalatuwa Hewaralalage Podi Manike – CA PHC NO. 204/2006-2013

The case between Udapola Dahanakage Samarasinghe (Appellant) and Kalatuwa Hewaralalage Podi Manike (Respondent) addressed whether an appeal should be entertained in the absence of the appellant and the failure to deposit mandatory brief fees. It was held that compliance with procedural requirements, specifically the timely payment of brief fees following court notice, is essential to sustain an appeal. The principle reaffirmed was that an appeal will be rejected if there is non-compliance with court directives concerning procedural obligations. This determination followed established procedural rules, emphasizing that adherence to mandatory court requirements is a prerequisite for further consideration of an appeal.

A.W.A. Salam J. — The findings established that the appellant neither ap