Sisiliya Rajapakshe vs Nalani Gunawardana – CA 686/2000-2014

In Nalani Gunawardana (Plaintiff-Respondent) v. Sisiliya Rajapakshe (Substituted Defendant-Appellant), the court considered whether the Substituted Defendant-Appellant had exercised due diligence in prosecuting an appeal following the death of the initial parties. It was determined that the appellant was absent and unrepresented despite proper notification, and the death of the respondent was acknowledged by counsel. The findings established that the appeal had not been pursued with requisite diligence, leading to the dismissal of the appeal without costs. This decision reaffirmed the necessity of active prosecution of appeals for their continuance and relied on established procedural requirements for appeal proceedings, underscoring that the absence of prosecution justifies dismissal and