Urban Development Authority vs M.R.L. de Costa – CA PHC/238/15-2023

In the case between M.R.L. de Costa (Appellant) and the Urban Development Authority (Respondent), the court addressed the issue of whether the appellant’s construction was authorized under a valid permit, considering the requirements for an approved building plan and certificate of conformity. It was held that the appellant bore the legal burden to produce documentary evidence substantiating the validity of the permit and compliance with statutory requirements. The principle reaffirmed is that the party claiming compliance under the Urban Development Authority Act must prove such compliance by submitting the requisite evidence. The decision relied on statutory provisions, specifically Section 28(A)(3) of the Urban Development Authority Act, and established case law, underscoring that failu