IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE DEMOCRATIC SOCIALIST REPUBLIC OF SRI LANKA Sarosha Mandika Wijeratne, No. 11, Esther Avenue, Park Road, Colombo 05.

PLAINTIFF Vs.

SC Appeal 117/2016 Colombo Municipal Council, WP/HCCA/COL/06/2009(F)

Town Hall, DC Colombo Case No. Colombo 07.

23926/MR DEFENDANT AND BETWEEN Colombo Municipal Council, Town Hall, Colombo 07.

DEFENDANT-APPELLANT Vs.

Sarosha Mandika Wijeratne, No. 11, Esther Avenue, Park Road, Colombo 05.

PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT AND NOW BETWEEN Colombo Municipal Council, No. 11, Esther Avenue, Park Road, Colombo 05.

DEFENDANT-APPELLANT-APPELLANT J.M. Bhadranie Jayawardhana, Municipal Commissioner, Colombo Municipal Council, Town Hall, Colombo 07.

Vs.

Sarosha Mandika Wijeratne, No. 11, Esther Avenue, Park Road, Colombo 05.

PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT-

RESPONDENT BEFORE: S. THURAIRAJA, PC, J.

A. L. SHIRAN GOONERATNE, J. AND JANAK DE SILVA, J COUNSEL: Priyal Wijayaweera, PC with Senani Dayaratne and Anushka Hewapathirana for the Defendant-Appellant-Appellant.

Ikram Mohamed, PC with Charitha Jayawickrema for the Plaintiff-

Respondent-Respondent instructed by Mallawarachchi Associates.

WRITTEN Plaintiff-Respondent-Respondent on 22^nd June 2017 and 30^th April SUBMISSIONS: 2024 Defendant-Appellant-Petitioner on 24^th July 2017 and 29^th April 2024 ARGUED ON: 11^th March 2024 DECIDED ON: 21^st February 2025 THURAIRAJA, PC, J.

1. The case stems from the misfortune the Plaintiff-Respondent-Respondent (hereinafter the ‘Plaintiff) had to endure in the wee hours of the 23^rd morning of August 1999, when he, a vascular surgeon and a professor of Surgery at the Colombo Medical Faculty, had set off to the General Hospital of Colombo in a rush having been summoned for emergency surgery at around 3 a.m.

2. As he drove down the familiar Havelock Road, he had collided with an island in the centre of that road newly constructed by the Defendant-Appellant-Appellant (hereinafter the ‘Defendant’), Colombo Municipal Council. In a twisted turn of fate, the Plaintiff was then rushed to the General Hospital for treatment, having suffered serious injuries, particularly to his spine. The injury to his spine was described as permanent—and such would naturally be a great hindrance to any surgeon in their profession.

3. The permanence of the injury is well established by the medical reports presented before the District Court as well as by the testimony of Dr. Vasantha Perera, Consultant Orthopaedic, who treated the Plaintiff when he was admitted to the Hospital.

4. The Plaintiff states that he was warded for treatment at the Hospital for five days. He states that thereafter he was with a POP cast for a period of two months and a removable brace for a further period of two months. He had then gone to England for two years on sabbatical leave and had done research work as he could not stand and do surgeries for a long period at a stretch.

5. Following the accident, the Plaintiff had instituted action before the District Court of Colombo by plaint dated 19^th November 1999 against the Colombo Municipal Council for the negligence on their part claiming, inter alia, Rs. 10 million in compensation. He states that the injuries caused to him are such that they would affect him throughout his life. He claims the damage so caused to be incalculable in financial terms, and that Rs. 10 million would not begin to remedy the permanent injury caused to him.

6. The Plaintiff further claims that he conducted surgeries in several private hospitals and that he could not do such surgeries for a period of two years, resulting in a loss of income. He further states that he had to spend Rs. 150,000/- to repair his vehicle. While he has provided documentary proof of the expenses incurred to repair the vehicle, no evidence has been submitted as to his income.

7. By Judgment dated 26^th January 2009, the District Court of Colombo, having found in favour of the Plaintiff, has granted all relief prayed for by the Plaintiff. Aggrieved by this judgment, the Defendant Municipal Council had