Present : Dalton J. and Maartensz A.J.  1929

PALANIAPPA CHETTY v. AZEEZ et al.

207-D. C. Colombo, 26,364.

Money Lending Ordinance-Note endorsed in blank-Unenforceable Not a fictitious note-Ordinance No. 2 of 1918, s. 10 (1).

Where a blank promissory note was endorsed to the plaintiff who subsequently filled it up,-

Held, that the note was unenforceable by the plaintiff.

APPEAL  from a judgment of the District Judge of Colombo.

Garvin, for plaintiff, appellant.

Choksy, for defendant, respondent.

November 12, 1929. DALTON J.-

This action was to recover the sum of Rs. 1,000 alleged to be due on a promissory note. The first defendant, to whom the loan is said to have been made, had been declared insolvent, and the second defendant, the endorser of the note, set up in his defence, among other things, that the note had been given in blank by the first defendant to the plaintiff and that the latter had subsequently filled up the note. When the issues were framed it seems to have been assumed that under the Money Lending Ordinance, 1918, a blank note is a " fictitious " note within the meaning of the Ordinance, and the learned Distr