1 The revision petitioner is the defendant in O. S. No. 124 of 1956 of the Alleppey Sub-Court. The suit as originally framed was tor recovery of the money due under two bundles for Rs, 9600A each executed by the defendant in favour of the plaintiff's brother George Kuruvila and endorsed by the latter to the plaintiff. The defendant contended inter alia that the suit was not maintainable since the bundles which were insufficiently stamped were not admissible in evidence.
A preliminary issue was raised on this contention and after hearing both sides it was held that the suit was not maintainable as the claim based on insufficiently stamped hundies could not be enforced in a Court of law. Though it was further contended that the only course open to the Court was to dismiss the suit as the plaintiff who was an endorsee of the hundies was not entitled to fall back upon any cause of action based upon the Original debt, the Court held that the plaintiff should be given an opportunity to amend the plaint if he so chose and seek appropriate reliefs on the basis of such amendment. Two weeks' time was allowed for applying for the amendment; That application was opposed by the defendant. This r