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

1997 Supreme(Mad) 152

T.N.VALLINAYAGAM
P. Talamalai Chetty – Appellant
Versus
Rathinasamy – Respondent


Appearing Advocates:R. Singharavelan, Miss B. Sivagamasundari, Advocates.

Judgment :-

The plaintiff is the revision petitioner. A suit for recovery of money on a promissory note, initiated by him, has been dismissed by the Lower Court. As against the dismissal of the suit, the present revision has been filed.

2. In the written statement, the specific case of the defendant is that in a printed promissory note over the stamp he has signed and delivered the blank promissory note in the hands of the plaintiff.In fact he confirms the same in evidence when he was examined as D-W1. Unfortunately, the trial Court has held that the defendant has not even signed in Ex. A1 which is the promissory note. The lower Court relied upon some differences found in the evidence of P.W. 1 to P.W. 3 with reference to passing of consideration, and dismissed the suit.

3. The Judgment of the Lower Court has to be set aside, in view of the provision of Section 20 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The Section 20 reads as thus :-

'Where one person signs and delivers to another a paper stamped in accordance with the law relating to negotiable instruments then in force in India, and either wholly blank or having written thereon an incomplete negotiable instrument, he thereby gives prima







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