Inaya And Another v. Fathima – sllr 2006 volume 2 page 124

Inaya and Another v. Fathima, the court examined the maintainability of an application for leave to appeal from a District Court order, where the petition lacked an express prayer for leave to appeal or to set aside the order. It was determined that such an application is not maintainable, reaffirming the principle that a prayer for leave is a mandatory procedural requirement for appellate review under section 754(5) of the Civil Procedure Code. The decision was grounded on the proper procedural adherence demanded by sections 754(1), 754(2), and 754(5), emphasizing that failure to specifically seek leave to appeal or to set aside the impugned order precludes judicial review through such applications.

Somawansa J. — The application was examined in light of the preliminary objection regard