Goigoda Gunawardanage Don Raja Senanayake Gunawardene Vs. Kandy Municipal Council – CA PHC NO.202/2014-2022

In the case between Goigoda Gunawardanage Don Raja Senanayake Gunawardene (Petitioner) and Kandy Municipal Council, including the Mayor, Municipal Commissioner, Land Officer, and Planning Officer (Respondents), the court addressed the issue of compliance with procedural requirements for appellate review under Rule 3(1)(a) of the Court of Appeal (Appellate Procedure) Rules of 1990. It was held that the petitioner’s failure to provide original or duly certified documents, as mandated, prevented proper consideration of the application. The decision reaffirmed the principle that legal remedies are extended only to those who are vigilant in asserting their rights (“vigilantibus non dormientibus jura subveniunt”) and not to those neglectful of procedural obligations. This interpretation relied o