Sitthi Maleeha and Another v. Nihal Ignatius Perera and Others – sllr 1994 volume 3 page 270

In the case between Sitthi Maleeha and Another (Plaintiffs) and Nihal Ignatius Perera and Others (Defendants), the court addressed the issue of the validity and interpretation of Section 59 of the Mortgage Act after the amendments made by Law No. 20 of 1977 to the Civil Procedure Code, specifically relating to the setting aside of default decrees in hypothecary actions. It was held that the 1980 unofficial recasting of Section 59—which suggested a defendant could not have a default decree set aside—was misleading and did not represent the current law. The court reaffirmed the principle that the failure to serve summons to a defendant, thereby affecting the court’s jurisdiction, renders a default decree null and void, warranting its setting aside. This decision relied on statutory amendment