CHAGLA, C.J. :- A very interesting question under the Negotiable Instruments Act arises in this appeal, and the facts giving rise to this appeal may be shortly stated. One Hariram., who is a finance broker approached the plaintiff on 4-2-1949, representing to him that a loan of Rs.5,000 was required by the defendants, and the plaintiffs case was that on that representation he gave a bearer cheque for that amount to Hariram. This cheque was cashed by Hariram on the following day, i.e., 5-2-1949. On 11-2-1949, Hariram gave to the plaintiff a hundi drawn by the defendants which was an incomplete document, in that the necessary parts of the document were not filled in by the defendants themselves, and this hundi was brought by Hariram and given to the plaintiff in consideration of the loan of Rs.5,000 which the plaintiff had advanced on 4-2-1949. The plaintiff filled in the blanks in this hundi and made this incomplete document into a negotiable instrument, the makers of which were the defendants and the payee of which was the plaintiff. This hundi was discounted with the Central Bank, and when the Central Bank presented the hundi to the defendants for acceptance, the defendan