Mohamed Ismail Mohamed Sabri and others Vs. Abuthalibu Sithy Sareena and others – CA 358/99-2017

In the case between Mohamed Ismail Mohamed Sabri and Others (Plaintiffs) and Fathima Maheesa and Others (Defendants), the court addressed the issue of whether the Plaintiffs’ action was maintainable given that the plaint was not filed in the official language of the court (Sinhala) as mandated by Article 24(1) of the Constitution, and whether the Plaintiffs failed to properly read documents into evidence when closing their case. It was held that the Plaint, originally filed in English in 1985 and answered by the Defendants in English, having not been objected to for three decades and having caused no prejudice to the Defendants, did not invalidate the court process. The principle reaffirmed is that technical non-compliance in filing language, in the absence of demonstrated prejudice, shall