Amerasekera v. Amarasinghe – sllr 1998 volume 3 page 253

In Amerasekera v. Amarasinhhe, the court addressed whether the defendant’s defence in response to a claim on a promissory note—premised on general allegations of fraud and non-specific denials regarding the execution and stamping of the note—was sufficiently bona fide and prima facie sustainable under section 704 of the Civil Procedure Code, the Stamp Duty Act, and the Bills of Exchange Ordinance. It was determined that generalized assertions of fraud and mere technical defences, without factual substantiation or proper evidentiary support, do not constitute a credible or bona fide defence to such claims. The lower court’s order granting unconditional leave to defend was set aside, reaffirming the principle that a defendant must present a prima facie defence supported by specific particula