Skip to content


Suppai Goundan and anr. Vs. Kandaswami Goundan - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
CourtChennai
Decided On
Judge
Reported in80Ind.Cas.567
AppellantSuppai Goundan and anr.
RespondentKandaswami Goundan
Excerpt:
pro-note - endorsement by guardian of minor--endorsement in personal capacity, validity of--appeal, second--finding of fact based on no evidence, whether binding. - .....and there is nothing either in the body of the note or appended to the signature to show that she signed as guardian. both the lower courts have merely inferred, on no evidence, that she signed as guardian. the oases relied (sick)n by the district munsif are of very little assistance, since in each case it has to be decided on its own facts whether the endorser endorsed as guardian or not.2. when plaintiff was put to proof of this point and called no evidence, his suit must fail. it is not a case where evidence was not available. the widow, signatory could have been called and attestors could have been examined on the point.3. i find that the plaintiff has no locus standi to maintain this suit and that the lower courts have erred in law in coming to a finding of fact on no evidence. i.....
Judgment:

Wallace, J.

1. This appeal may be disposed of on the short ground that there is no evidence that the plaintiff is the holder of the pronote. The allegation in the plaint was that the guardian of the minor son of the payee transferred the pronote to plaintiff in her capacity as guardian. In the Written statement defendants challenged this allegation and put plaintiff to strict proof of it. Plaintiff has made no attempt to prove it. The endorsement of transfer is signed by the lady in her personal capacity, and there is nothing either in the body of the note or appended to the signature to show that she signed as guardian. Both the lower Courts have merely inferred, on no evidence, that she signed as guardian. The oases relied (sick)n by the District Munsif are of very little assistance, since in each case it has to be decided on its own facts whether the endorser endorsed as guardian or not.

2. When plaintiff was put to proof of this point and called no evidence, his suit must fail. It is not a case where evidence was not available. The widow, signatory could have been called and attestors could have been examined on the point.

3. I find that the plaintiff has no locus standi to maintain this suit and that the lower Courts have erred in law in coming to a finding of fact on no evidence. I reverse the judgment and decree of the lower Appellate Court and dismiss plaintiff's suit with costs to defendants throughout.


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