Murin Perera Vs Gajaweera – sllr 2005 volume 1 page 103

The case between Murin Perera (plaintiff-appellant) and Gajaweera (defendant-respondent) addressed whether the appellant should be permitted to re-cross examine the respondent regarding evidence of a second marriage, which is central to the issue of malicious desertion. It was held that the appellant must be allowed to re-cross examine the respondent on this point, reaffirming the principle that vital evidence not available during the original examination can be adduced under Sections 165 and 166 of the Civil Procedure Code and Section 138(4) of the Evidence Ordinance. The findings established that the refusal to permit such examination, when the evidence is critical to determining the respondent’s animus to repudiate the marriage, constitutes reversible error. The impact of the decision d