Karunawathie Wanniarachchi v. Madawita Withanage Sirisena et al. – CA L.A.NO. 156/2004-2016

In Karunawathie Wanniarachchi v. Madawita Withanage Sirisena and others, the court examined whether an action against the 4th defendant, the State Mortgage and Investment Bank, could be maintained in light of the “ouster clause” in Section 50 of the State Mortgage and Investment Bank Law No.13 of 1975. The action sought to challenge the validity of two mortgage bonds allegedly fraudulently executed. The prior dismissal by the District Judge on grounds of lack of jurisdiction was reviewed, with the appellate court determining that the plaintiff was not within the category barred by Section 50 and that District Court jurisdiction was not ousted, particularly where fraud was alleged. The decision reaffirmed the principle that statutory ouster clauses must be strictly construed, relying on Sup