N RAMESH REDDY Vs. G RANGARAO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The point involved in this revision is whether the document in question is a bond or a promissory note. The learned District Munsif held that it is a bond as it is attested by two witnesses and also the vital words "payable to or your order" are missing in the said document. Against that order, the defendant has gled the present-revision petition.

(2.) The main contention of the petitioner is that merely because the document does not mention the words "payable to or your order" it does not cease to be a promissory note. In support of his contention he relied on a decision in M. Akbar Khan vs. Attar Singh. In that case, the Privy Council while considering whether a document is merely a receipt or a promissory note held as follows:

(3.) Further relying on a decision in Mahmood Hassan Khan vs. C.C.Revenue Authority he contended that the document in question is a promissory note and not a bond and therefore the order of the learned Judge is liable to be set aside.