IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE DEMOCRATIC SOCIALIST REPUBLIC OF SRI LANKA In the matter of an Appeal against the Judgement dated 01.10.2015 of the Civil Appellate High Court of the Southern Province Holden in Tangalle in terms of section 5C of the High Court of the Provinces (Special Provisions) (Amendment)

Act No. 54 of 2006. SC Appeal 179/2016 SC( HCCA)LA No.373/15 SP/HCCA/TA/18/2011(F)

DC Walasmulla Case No. S/112 1. Thelikorale Arachchige Pemadasa No. 295, In front of Bus Depot.

Embilipitiya

2. Thelikorale Arachchige Susara Dhammika “Sithumina” Uswewa Tangalle Plaintiffs Vs.

1. Ruhunu Development Bank, Head office No. 382A, Anagarika Dharmapala Mawatha, Pamburana, Matara.

2. Hettiarachchilage Ariyadasa “ Tharanga”, Katuwana Road, Middeniya.

Defendants And Now Between Hettiarachchilage Ariyadasa “Tharanga”, Katuwana Road, Middeniya.

2nd Defendant-Respondent-Appellant Vs.

1. Ruhunu Development Bank, Head office No. 382A, Anagarika Dharmapala Mawatha, Pamburana, Matara.

1A Pradeshiya Sanwardena Bank Head Office No. 933, Kandy Road, Wedamulla, Kelaniya.

1B Pradeshiya Sanwardena Bank Circular Road, Uyanwatte, Matara.

1^st Defendant-Respondent-

Respondents

2. Thelikorale Arachchige Pemadasa No. 295, In front of Bus Depot.

Embilipitiya.

1^st Plaintiff-Respondent

3. Thelikorale Arachchige Susara Dhammika “Sithumina” Uswewa Tangalle

2nd Plaintiff-Apellant-Respondent Before : Jayantha Jayasuriya, PC, CJ Vijith K. Malalgoda, PC, J.

Janak de Silva, J.

Counsel : W.Dayaratne, PC with R. Jayawardana instructed by C Dayaratne for the 2^nd Defendant-Respondent-Appellant.

Dr. Jayatissa de Costa, PC with N.A.. Gunarathne for the

2^nd Plaintiff-Appellant-Respondent.

Yuresha de Silva , DSG for the 1B Defendant-Respondent-

Respondent.

Written submissions : 1A and 1B Defendant-Respondent-Respondents on 30.08.2017 filed 2^nd Plaintiff-Appellant-Respondent on 27.11.2017

2^nd Defendant-Respondent- Appellant on 22. 10.2021 Argued on : 12.07.2023 Decided on : 27.03.2024 Jayantha Jayasuriya, PC, CJ The 2^nd defendant-respondent-appellant (herein after referred to as the “appellant”) impugns the judgement of the Civil Appellate High Court of Tangalle dated 01.10.2015. The Civil Appellate High Court set aside the judgment of the District Court and decided in favour of the plaintiffs.

The 1^st plaintiff-respondent (hereinafter referred to as the “1 ^st plaintiff-respondent”) and the 2 ^nd plaintiff-appellant-respondent (hereinafter referred to as the “2 ^nd plaintiff-respondent”) jointly instituted action in the District Court naming inter alia the appellant and the 1^st defendant-

respondent-respondent (hereinafter referred to as the “respondent bank”) as defendants.

The 1^st plaintiff-respondent obtained a loan of Rs 200,000/= from the respondent bank and pledged the property that was more fully described in the schedule to the plaint, as security. The 2^nd plaintiff-respondent (who is the brother of the 1^st plaintiff-respondent) was the lawful owner of the aforesaid property. Two and half years later the 1^st plaintiff-respondent had been informed that the board of directors of the respondent bank decided to auction the aforesaid property as the 1^st plaintiff respondent failed to repay the aforesaid loan. Accordingly, the respondent bank proceeded with the auction and had initially purchased the property on the basis that there was no proper bid at the auction. Accordingly, the respondent bank has issued a Certificate of Sale under Section.15(1) of the Recovery of Loans by Banks Act, No 4 of 1990. Subsequently, the appellant purchased the aforesaid property from the respondent bank.

The 1^st and 2^nd plaintiff-respondents in their plaint inter alia prayed for declarations that the auction and the subsequent sale are illegal. Further, they sought an order directing that the undisturbed possession of the aforesaid land be handed over to the 2^nd plaintiff-respondent, upon payment of all dues including the interest and charges to the respondent bank.

The trial in the District Court proceeded on sixteen is