Only two issues were raised by the first, fourth and fifth defendants in their appeal against an O 14 judgment entered against them on 19 May 1987. The first is the service of the notices of demand on them, dated 1 October 1986.

At the material time, the first defendant was a customer of the plaintiff and they are sued for the non-repayment of two fixed loan facilities granted by the plaintiff pursuant to two loan agreements dated 23 July 1981 and 25 March 1982. The fourth and fifth defendants were directors of the first defendant and they are sued in their capacities as guarantors for the repayment of the two fixed loans pursuant to two guarantees dated 27 February 1982 and 8 March 1982.

From the plaintiff's own documents, it is clear that the notice of demand dated 1 October 1986 although addressed to the first defendant, was acknowledged to have been received by a company called Sri Alam Sdn Bhd, who is in no way connected to these proceedings.

Under cl 8 of the two guarantees executed by the fourth and fifth defendants, service of the notice of demand on them may be effected in one of two ways, ie by personal service or by posting the notice through the post