Samarasekera v. Mudiyanse and Others – sllr 1990 volume 1 page 137

In the case between Samarasekera (Plaintiff) and Mudiyanse and Others (Defendants), the court addressed the issue of procedural compliance in applications for revision under Rule 46 of the Supreme Court Rules. The central holding established that an application seeking revision of a Magistrate’s order must include the full record of proceedings—comprising all evidence, documents, pleadings, and the order itself—at the time of filing. The principle reaffirmed demands strict observance of procedural rules to prevent delays and to facilitate an effective review of lower court decisions. Reliance was placed on prior case law defining “proceedings” and the intention behind Rule 46, emphasizing that such requirements are mandatory and not directory. The application was dismissed for non-complian