Hildon v. Munaweera – sllr 1997 volume 3 page 220

In the case between the landlord (plaintiff-respondent) and the tenant (defendant-petitioner), the court addressed the issue of whether the plaintiff-respondent was entitled to lead evidence in rebuttal after having closed the case. The judgment determined that the plaintiff-respondent is not permitted to call rebuttal evidence except when truly unexpected evidence arises that could not have been foreseen from the pleadings. The legal principle reaffirmed is that a party must present all evidence supporting its case at the outset and cannot use rebuttal to address anticipated matters. This decision relied on Section 150 of the Civil Procedure Code and the authority of Jaganadan Pillai v. Perera, emphasizing that procedural fairness requires strict adherence to the established rules governi