SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1870 Supreme(Cal) 143

Fleming – Appellant
Versus
Shearman – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Sir Richard Couch, Kt., C.J. - We are of opinion that there was sufficient evidence of the payment of the bills by the plaintiffs. There is no question that the bills were drawn against the consignments, and the defendant in his evidence said, "I got the proceeds of the bills drawn against the shipments, which bills I sold to banks; no demand has been made on me as the drawer of those bills; I have received no notice of the dishonor of those bills." If the bills had been refused acceptance, and the plaintiffs after signing their names as acceptors had cancelled the signatures and kept the bills in their possession, as it has been suggested by the defendant's counsel might have been done, the defendant must in the ordinary course of things have received notice of the dishonor, or some demand would have been made upon him by the banks. If the goods had been sold by or on account of the holders of the bills in consequence of the non-acceptance of them, the defendant must have had some notice of it. The correspondence shows, and the fact cannot be doubted, that the goods were sold by the plaintiffs, which they could not have done if they had not accepted the bills. The fair inf

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top