Skip to content


Kanhaiya Lal Vs. Domingo and anr. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectBanking;Civil
CourtAllahabad High Court
Decided On
Judge
Reported in(1875)ILR1All732
AppellantKanhaiya Lal
RespondentDomingo and anr.
Excerpt:
promissory note - assignment of chose in action--form of suit by assignee--act ix of 1872 (contract act), section 62. - - courts of equity allow an assignee of a chose in action to sue in his own name, and inasmuch as our courts are courts of equity as well as of law, in our judgment an assignee of a chose in action is entitled to sue in his own name......assignor may also be set up against the assignee, or at least such defences as might have been set up, up to the time when notice of the assignment was given to the defendant. the judge of the small cause court may be informed.....
Judgment:

1. The promissory note is not made payable to any other person than the payee. It is not made payable to 'order,' nor to 'bearer.' It is therefore not a negotiable instrument.' Nevertheless by the law of India a chose in action is assignable. Courts of Equity allow an assignee of a chose in action to sue in his own name, and inasmuch as our Courts are Courts of Equity as well as of Law, in our judgment an assignee of a chose in action is entitled to sue in his own name. It is, however, requisite for the Courts to bear in mind that whatever defences might be set up against the assignor may also be set up against the assignee, or at least such defences as might have been set up, up to the time when notice of the assignment was given to the defendant. The Judge of the Small Cause Court may be informed accordingly.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //