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

1943 Supreme(Mad) 46

KING
Rangayya Naidu – Appellant
Versus
Sundaramurthy Mudaliar – Respondent


JUDGMENT

King, J.

1. This is a petition filed against the decree given by the learned District Munsiff of Ranipet in S.C.S. No. 127 of 1941. The suit was filed by the plaintiff as endorsee of a promissory note against three defendants. The first defendant is the father and guardian of his minor son the second defendant. It was alleged by the plaintiff that the promissory note had been signed by the first defendant both in his personal capacity and as guardian of his son the second defendant. The consideration of Rs. 243 was alleged to have been paid in cash. The first defendant admitted the genuineness of his signature in so far as it affected himself, but denied its genuineness in so far as he is supposed to have signed it as guardian of his son. He says, however, that when he signed the promissory note it was only a blank piece of paper and that he received only Rs. 5 as consideration and that amount also not from the payee but from the payees step-son. The third defendant pleaded that his signature was forged.

2. The findings of the learned District Munsiff were that all the signatures of the first defendant were genuine and that the story that he signed on a blank piece of paper w



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