PUNYAMURTHY VENKATA SATYANARAYANA SHETTI Vs. GUNDA SUBBAIAH CHETTY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant made a promissory note on 15-12-1953 in favour of the 1st respondent. When a demand was made by the latter for payment of the amount clue thereon he stated that the money had been paid to the 2nd respondent who is the 1st respondents adopted son and pleaded discharge of his obligation thereunder; Thereupon, the 1st respondent instituted the suit out of which this appeal arises, impleading the appellant as the 1st defendant and his (the plaintiffs) adopted son as the 2nd. The principal defence raised to the suit is to be found in paragraph 4 of the lst defendants written statement and is as follows :

(2.) The learned District Judge held that the plea so raised is not a good plea in law. The question in the present appeal is whether his view is right. In our opinion, it is and we shall proceed to give our reasons.

(3.) Now, it is enacted by Section 78 of the Negotiable Instruments Act that