Wickramarachchige Somarathna vs Asarappulige Wimalawathie – CA PHC NO. 139/2007-2013

In the case between Wickramarachchige Somarathna (Appellant) and Asarappulige Wimalawathie (Respondent), the central issue addressed was whether the appeal could proceed in the appellant’s absence and after non-payment of brief fees as required. It was held that, due to the appellant’s failure to pay the requisite fees despite notice, the appeal must be rejected. The ruling reaffirmed the procedural principle that compliance with court-ordered filing requirements is essential for an appeal to be entertained. The decision relied on procedural practice governing appellate processes, underscoring the importance of adhering to court directives regarding brief fee deposits.

A.W.A.Salam J. — It was determined that the appellant was absent and unrepresented despite prior notice concerning the d