Beasley, J.

1. The suit here was to recover Rs. 165-11-0 due on a promissory note dated 10th August 1930 executed by the defendant in favour of one Malliah who endorsed it to plaintiff 1 for Rs. 120 payable with interest at 12 per cent, per annum. The date of the endorsement is 14th August 1934. Before that, on 14th July 1934, Malliah the transferor had been adjudicated an insolvent and the Official Receiver was made a party to the suit. The defendant contended amongst other things that the plaintiffs were not entitled to sue and he also pleaded partial discharge. This latter plea was found against by the trial Judge who held that the suit was maintainable and that plaintiff 2, namely the Official Receiver, stood in the shoes of the debtor and he therefore gave a decree in favour of plaintiff 2 with costs but dismissed plaintiff 1s suit, plaintiff 1 being the endorsee of the promissory note. If the adjudication of Malliah had stood, there would be nothing wrong so far as I am able to see with the lower Courts order; but further information shows that the order of adjudication passed on 14th July 1934 was passed on a creditors petition and was ex parte, and that later on, on 20t