Skip to content


M.P. Rm. Irulandi Mudaliar Vs. Syed Ibrahi and ors. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCivil
CourtChennai High Court
Decided On
Case NumberCivl Revn. Petn. No. 165 of 1961
Judge
Reported inAIR1962Mad326
ActsNegotiable Instruments Act - Sections 20
AppellantM.P. Rm. Irulandi Mudaliar
RespondentSyed Ibrahi and ors.
Excerpt:
- .....of the executant muhammad ibrahim as he had died by then. the petitioner realising that the payee's name had not been filled up applied to the court to return the two promissiory notes to him to enable him to fill the blanks and represent the same into court (2) section 20 of the negotiable instruments act says that where a promissiory note is signed and delivered to another person on a paper, properly stamped, leaving blanks the person to whomthe promissioary note is delivered will prima facie have authority to make the document complete.if the section were to be applied to this case, the petitioner will have authority to fill in his name and what he wants now to do is simply to exercise his power under that provision. it is not contended that if the petitioner had the authority.....
Judgment:
ORDER

1. This revision petition is directed against an order of the District Munsiff of paramakudi declining to return two promissiory notes which were the subject matter of the suit before him for filing up the names of the payee. The promissiory notes were executed by one. Muhammad Ibrahim for sums borrowed at Rangoon. They are duly stamped in accordance with the provisions of the indian stamp act. The prommissiory notes, however, did not bear the name of the payee; a space was left in blank for filing up the name and it is the petitioner' that he was authorised to fill in his name at any time that he chose; but due to mistake he omitted to fill in his name in the promissory notes before instituting the suit thereon. The suit was filed against the legal representative of the executant Muhammad Ibrahim as he had died by then. The petitioner realising that the payee's name had not been filled up applied to the court to return the two promissiory notes to him to enable him to fill the blanks and represent the same into court

(2) Section 20 of the Negotiable Instruments Act says that where a promissiory note is signed and delivered to another person on a paper, properly stamped, leaving blanks the person to whomthe promissioary note is delivered will prima facie have authority to make the document complete.If the section were to be applied to this case, the petitioner will have authority to fill in his name and what he wants now to do is simply to exercise his power under that provision. It is not contended that if the petitioner had the authority of putting his name the death of Muhammad Ibrahim s a statutory one and alone one coup0led with an interest. The death of the person givng the authority cannot affect the right.

But whatever that may be, it is unnecessary to decide here whether in the circumstances of this case the petitioner had authority statutory or otherwise to fillup the blanks. That question can be agitated by taking an issue in the suit. At the present moment justice requires that the petitioner should be allowed to fillin the name in the promissionary notes. This he will be allowed to do in the presence of the Head clerk of District Munsiff court at a time appointed by him for the purpose; the Head clerk will add an eddorsement on the note that the name of the payee isd inserted on the date on which it is so done. This will not preclude the respondents from raising the contention that the promissiory note is inadmissible in evidence for want of proper stamp or that there were circumstances in the case to show that the petitioner had no authority.

(3) The civil revision petition is allowed. There will be no order as to costs.

(4) Petition allowed.


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