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

1967 Supreme(Mad) 46

RAMAPRASADA RAO
Karupiah Palukki (died) – Appellant
Versus
Periasami – Respondent


Advocates:
T.R. Ramachandran, for Petitioners; K. Gopalachari, for Respondent.

JUDGEMENT :- The plaintiff was the petitioner in this Court. After filing the civil revision petition, he died on 22-1-1966 and on an application by his legal representatives, they were brought on record as the present petitioners in C.M.P. No. 4412 of 1966. It is significant that at the time when the legal representatives of the original petitioner desired to bring themselves on record, there was no opposition by the respondent.

2. The petitioners instituted the action against the defendant on the foot of a promissory note, of which he secured assignment from the original payee. The assignment, however, was for purposes of collection and that this is so, is not in dispute. The original payee died after such endorsement in favour of the petitioner. After the death of the original payee, the petitioner instituted this suit on the foot of such an assignment of the promissory note Ex. A-1 in his favour. The suit was resisted on the ground that since the original payee died, the endorsee has no further cause of action, as the agency which was expressly created by such an endorsement should be deemed to have been terminated by the death of the original payee.

3. The learned District Munsi















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