BHASKARAN CHANDRASEKHARAN Vs. V RADHAKRISHNAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The question that has come up for consideration in this case is as to whether insertion of a date or an undated cheque would amount to material alteration within the meaning of Section 87 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.

(2.) Appellant was the defendant in O.S. No. 16 of 1986 of the Sub Court, Kottarakkara. Suit was instituted by the respondent-plaintiff for realisation of Rs. 30,000/- with interest. According to him, defendant had borrowed an amount of Rs. 30,000/- and issued a cheque dated 11-6-1985 for the said amount. Cheque was sent for collection through the Catholic Syrian Bank, Kottarakkara. But the cheque was dishonoured stating 'refer to drawer'. Advocate notice dated 8-7-1985 issued to the defendant. Defendant did not respond to the notice. Hence the plaintiff instituted the suit. Defendant in his written statement stated that he had not borrowed Rs. 30,000/- from the plaintiff. However, he admitted the issuance of the cheque. According to him, it was issued without consideration for adjustment of certain transactions in connection with toddy shops of Kottarakkara Range.

(3.) In order to establish his case, plaintiff got himself examined as PW 1. Defendant got himself examined as DW 1. On the date of the plaintiff Exts. A1 to A3 were produced and defendant produced Exts. B1 to B6.