Skip to content


Panchi Cowri Sadhu Khan Vs. Satya Dhenu Ghosal - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectBanking
CourtKolkata
Decided On
Reported inAIR1936Cal489,166Ind.Cas.747
AppellantPanchi Cowri Sadhu Khan
RespondentSatya Dhenu Ghosal
Excerpt:
- .....execution is admitted, and it is also admitted, that payments upon the contract had been made from time to time in the past.. at the last hearing an exceedingly interesting argument was developed, however of a technical nature, which amounted to a plea in bar by way of demurrer. it was contended that this note was never presented, as it should have been within the language of the note at calcutta the place in which payment was to be made, or at all, and reliance was placed upon various sections in the negotiable instruments act which deal with the question of presentation.2. the answer to that which was made by mr. bose for the plaintiff is, i think, sound in law. he argued that the particular facts of this case brought it well within the ambit of sub-section (d) to section 76,.....
Judgment:

Cunliffe, J.

1. This is a simple case upon a promissory note, in which I have the advantage of having a considerable argument on an earlier occasion from Mr. Das who appeared for the defendant. On the last occasion I expressed a wish that the case should be definitely disposed of to-day, but on being called on Mr. Das asked for a further adjournment on the ground that one of his witnesses was not available, or rather his client was not here. But I refused his application to adjourn. This suit is on a promissory note and there appears to be very little defence upon the pleadings. The execution is admitted, and it is also admitted, that payments upon the contract had been made from time to time in the past.. At the last hearing an exceedingly interesting argument was developed, however of a technical nature, which amounted to a plea in bar by way of demurrer. It was contended that this note was never presented, as it should have been within the language of the note at Calcutta the place in which payment was to be made, or at all, and reliance was placed upon various sections in the Negotiable Instruments Act which deal with the question of presentation.

2. The answer to that which was made by Mr. Bose for the plaintiff is, I think, sound in law. He argued that the particular facts of this case brought it well within the ambit of Sub-section (d) to Section 76, Negotiable Instruments Act, and that subsection indicates that where no hardship is shown in the case of a note which has not passed into other hands but is still in the hands of the drawer, the drawer cannot possibly say to any body that he is going to suffer any damage for want of presentation. Now, this seems to me to be exactly this case. It is acknowledged that the note was properly executed. It is acknowledged also that the money passed, as I have said, and here we find too that from time to time the drawer showed that he recognized his indebtedness by making various payments. In these circumstances it seems to me that there is no defence to the action at all, and I shall give judgment for the plaintiff for the amount claimed with a deduction of Rs. 910 being an amount which is not mentioned in the plaint. The costs will follow the event. The plaintiff will also be entitled to interim interest.


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