Ruhunuge Sirisena vs Hewa Kankanamage Pushpa Rajani – SC APPEAL NO. 117/2010-2013

In the case between Hewa Kankanamage Pushpa Rajani and Ruhunuge Sirisena, the Supreme Court addressed the allocation of the burden of proof in an application for maintenance under the Maintenance Act No. 37 of 1999. It was determined that the Applicant bears the initial burden under Section 2 to prove inability to maintain herself, while Section 11 requires the Respondent to show cause why the application should not be granted. Upon review, the court found that the Respondent failed to satisfactorily demonstrate a lack of sufficient means and did not show cause against the maintenance claim. The decision reaffirmed that, where evidence supports a claimant’s need and the Respondent fails to rebut the presumption of means, maintenance may be ordered, with enforcement including arrears and le