Matilda Herathge vs. Halowita Arachchige Dayananda – SC APPEAL NO. 97/2011-2023

Brief
In the case between Matilda Herathge (Plaintiff–Petitioner–Appellant) and Halowita Arachchige Dayananda (Defendant–Respondent), the court addressed whether the District Court’s refusal to mark a document (Folio G/63/221/P7/P10) was proper under evidentiary and procedural rules, including sections 138(3) of the Evidence Ordinance and 175(2) of the Civil Procedure Code. It was held that the refusal to admit the document was justified due to the Plaintiff’s failure to list it as required, and allowing its introduction at a late stage would have unfairly prejudiced the Defendant. The principle reaffirmed is that re-examination may only clarify issues raised in cross-examination and does not permit the introduction of new evidence, except in exceptional circumstances. The appeal was dismi