Legal Question in Civil Litigation in India

ur query is deficient in details.

25.04.2012

Dear Sir / Madam,

In Subbaraya Gounder vs Palaniyathal on 19 August, 2011

The unsuccessful defendant was the appellant who had contested the suit denying the execution of the promissory note and alleged that the promissory note was forged and created by the husband of the respondent and he has not executed any promissory note as alleged by the respondent.

THE HONOURABLE JUSTICE R.S.RAMANATHAN after examining the statement of the prime witnesses confirming that the thumb impression of the appellant was affixed in their presence held - It is true that when there is material alteration in a negotiable instrument, then the negotiable instrument will become void and no right accrues under the said promissory note. In this case, we have to see whether there is any material alteration. As stated supra, though the appellant disputed the signature in the promissory note, he has not taken any steps to compare the signature found in the promissory note with that of his admitted signature executed prior to the execution of the promissory note. Except the denial in the written statement and in the evidence, no attempt was made by the appellant to prove the signature found in the promissory note was not that of his signature. Prime Witness.2 and PW.3 have given evidence about the execution of the promissory note by the appellant. Of course, there are some minor variations in the evidence of PW.2 and PW.3 and has rightly held by the Lower Appellate Court, those variations will not help the appellant and that will not prove that the promissory note was not executed by the appellant.

You can mail me for further on-line legal advice at [email protected]

Regards,