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

1937 Supreme(Mad) 446

ALFRED HENRY LIONEL LEACH
S. Maruthamuthu Naicker – Appellant
Versus
P. Kadir Badsha Rowther – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Alfred Henry Lionel Leach, C.J.

1. This is a reference under Order 46, Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, by the Subordinate Judge of Tanjore in a suit on a promissory note. The note was executed by the first and second defendants in favour of one Ponnusami Naicker who indorsed it to the plaintiff. The two sons of the second defendant who constitute with him an undivided family have been made defendants, as it is sought to make them liable on the ground that the debt was incurred for family purposes by the second defendant in his capacity of managing member. The sons having raised the plea that the plaintiff as the indorsee is not entitled to sue them on the strength of the indorsement of the instrument, the Subordinate Judge has referred to us this question:

Whether an indorsee of a promissory note executed by the managing member is entitled to recover the debt from the property of the non-executant coparceners on the ground of their liability under the Hindu Law or whether he is limited to the remedy available on the note.

2. It is a fundamental principle of the law relating to negotiable instruments that no one whose name does not appear on the instrument can be held li

















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