IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE DEMOCRATIC SOCIALIST REPUBLIC OF SRI LANKA In the matter of an application for Leave to Appeal from the judgment of the High Court of Civil Appeal of the Western Province (Holden in Colombo)

Janashakthi Insurance Company Limited, No. 47, Muttiah Road, Colombo 02.

Present Address Level 25-27, One Galle Face Tower, No. 1A, Centre Road, Galle Face, Colombo 02.

Plaintiff Vs.

SC/HCCA/LA/329/2023 Sri Lanka Insurance Corporation Ltd., WP/HCCA/COL/02/2017 (F) No. 21, Vauxhall Street, DC Colombo Case No.7812/SPL Colombo 02.

Defendant And Janashakthi Insurance Company Limited, No. 47, Muttiah Road, Colombo 02.

Present Address Level 25-27, One Galle Face Tower, No. 1A, Centre Road, Galle Face, Colombo 02.

Plaintiff- Appellant Vs.

Sri Lanka Insurance Corporation Ltd., No. 21, Vauxhall Street, Colombo 02.

Defendant-Respondent AND NOW BETWEEN Sri Lanka Insurance Corporation Ltd., No. 21, Vauxhall Street, Colombo 02.

Defendant-Respondent-Petitioner Vs.

Janashakthi Insurance Company Limited, No. 47, Muttiah Road, Colombo 02.

Presently, Allianz Insurance Lanka Limited, Level 25-27, One Galle Face Tower, No. 1A, Centre Road, Galle Face, Colombo 02.

Plaintiff – Appellant- Respondent Before: Murdu N.B. Fernando, PC, CJ.

Yasantha Kodagoda, PC, J., and Arjuna Obeyesekere, J.

Counsel: Chandaka Jayasundere PC with Chandimal Mendis and Dinithi Hewavitharana instructed by Hemantha Rajapaksha for the Defendant-Respondent-Petitioner.

Nigel Hatch PC with Rajindra Jayasinghe and Ms. S. Illangage instructed by Julius and Creasy for the Plaintiff-Appellant-Respondent Argued on: 08-10-2024 and 15-10-2024 Decided on: 26-05-2025 Murdu N.B. Fernando, PC, CJ., 01. We have heard the learned President’s Counsel for the Petitioner and the Respondent exhaustively.

02. We appreciate the submissions made by Mr. Chandaka Jayasundere, PC on behalf of the Defendant-Respondent-Petitioner (“Petitioner”) that the Plaintiff-Appellant-Respondent (“Respondent”) has failed to establish a contractual relationship between the Petitioner and the Respondent. Mr. Jayasundere, PC contended, that the failure of the Respondent to annex and produce the contract of re-insurance entered between the Sri Lanka Insurance Corporation and the National Insurance Corporation was fatal for the maintainability of the instant application and therefore, the dismissal of the action by the trial court was correct and justified. Further, it was contended on behalf of the Petitioner, that the setting aside of the trial court judgement by the Civil Appellate High Court of the Western Province (“the High Court”), was erroneous and moved that it be revised and set aside.

Mr. Nigel Hatch, PC on behalf of the Respondent, strenuously argued that the Petitioner cannot maintain this Special Leave to Appeal application upon merits and also on the principle of Res Judicata, as this Court has examined the matters in issue and rejected the Special Leave to Appeal Application in a connected matter between the very same parties.

03. We have considered the factual matrix of this application, viz., - On 12-05-1987, two marine cargo policies were issued and a contract of insurance was entered into between National Insurance Corporation (‘NIC’), and P.B. Umbichy Limited, an importer of goods, in relation to a consignment of lentils on board MV Elitor;

- The consignment failed to reach the port of Colombo. The importer claimed on the contract of insurance but the NIC failed to honour the policy of insurance;

- The importer then sued the NIC on the policy and the trial court entered judgement in favour of the importer. This decision of the trial court was subsequently upheld by the Supreme Court;

- Consequent to the District Court judgement that directed the NIC to honour the contract of insurance, the NIC filed two separate actions, bearing case No. 7712/Spl and 7812/Spl, in the District Court of Colombo against Sri Lanka Insurance Corporation Limited (“SLIC”), seeking declaratory relief that the NIC has re-insured