Skip to content


Udayar Pillai Vs. Muthia Pillai - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCivil
CourtChennai
Decided On
Reported in(1897)7MLJ231
AppellantUdayar Pillai
RespondentMuthia Pillai
Cases Referred and Abboy Chetti v. Ramachandra Rao I.L.R.
Excerpt:
- 1. the decree of the district munsif is right for the reason stated by him.2. the pro-note is not payable to a specified person or to bearer or to the order of a specified person, and it is, therefore, not a negotiable instrurieiit. there is therefore, no objection to its transfer otherwise than by endorsement. in both the cases relied on by the petitioner pattat ambadi marar v. kishnan i.l.r. 11 m. 290 and abboy chetti v. ramachandra rao i.l.r. 17 m. 461 the notes were payable to a specified person or order, which made them negotiable instruments, and therefore not transferable except by endorsement.3. we dismiss the petition with costs.
Judgment:

1. The decree of the District Munsif is right for the reason stated by him.

2. The pro-note is not payable to a specified person or to bearer or to the order of a specified person, and it is, therefore, not a negotiable instrurieiit. There is therefore, no objection to its transfer otherwise than by endorsement. In both the cases relied on by the petitioner Pattat Ambadi Marar v. Kishnan I.L.R. 11 M. 290 and Abboy Chetti v. Ramachandra Rao I.L.R. 17 M. 461 the notes were payable to a specified person or order, which made them negotiable instruments, and therefore not transferable except by endorsement.

3. We dismiss the petition with costs.


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