Sirisena v. Perera – sllr 1999 volume 3 page 295

In the case between Sirisena (Plaintiff) and Perera (Defendant), the court addressed the issue of whether a notice to quit for arrears of rent under the Rent Act required specification of the exact amount of arrears, and whether the lack of receipts for rent payments affected the notice’s validity. It was held that the statutory notice under section 22(3) of the Rent Act is sufficient if it specifies that the tenant is in arrears for three or more months, without the necessity to state the monetary sum outstanding. Evidence demonstrated the defendant’s acknowledgment of arrears and receipt of the notice. The court reaffirmed the principle that clarity of the period of arrears, not the amount, satisfies statutory requirements. The appeal was dismissed and the lower court’s decision affirmed