Ramanayake v. Sampath Bank Ltd. and Others – sllr 1993 volume 1 page 145

In the case between Sampath Bank Limited (Plaintiff–Respondent) and the 3rd defendant–petitioner (guarantor), with the 1st and 2nd defendants–respondents (borrowers) and 4th defendant–respondent (guarantor), the court addressed the application of the Debt Recovery (Special Provisions) Act, No. 2 of 1990, in enforcing a debt. It was held that procedural compliance with statutory requirements—including a properly supported affidavit and supporting documents establishing that the sum claimed is “justly due”—was sufficient for recovery under the Act. Objections based on technicalities, including the alleged lack of a written demand and purported defects in the affidavit, were determined not to undermine the decree nisi made absolute where no substantive defence or triable issue had been raised