1. In answer to a suit on the foot of a promissory note the defendant, who is the respondent before us, denied execution and consideration, and contended also that the suit was not by the promisee, a banking company, but only by its power of attorney agent who had no right to sue, and that the suit was therefore liable to rejection. The court below found against the defendant both on the question of execution and consideration, but, surprisingly enough, holding in his favour on his contention regarding the frame of the suit, dismissed the suit. The plaintiff has therefore appealed.

2. The cause title of the plaint which is in Malayalam may be translated as follows:- "The Kottayam Bank Ltd. for the above Bank its Mukthiyar C.K. Parameswara Panicker". In the face of this cause title we find it difficult to understand how the court below was able to say, "In the present case it admits of no doubt that the plaintiff is C.K. Parameswara Panicker and not the Kottayam Bank Ltd." Even if the cause title is to be read as the "Kottayam Bank Ltd., by its Mukthiyar C.K. Parameswara Panicker", as Mr. Krishnamurthi Iyer for the defendant would have us read it there is nothing in law t