CHANAN RAM Vs. KAHAN SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Chanan Ram, proprietor of Mangal Bam Chanan Ram'of Nabha (Pepsu), on the 15th of September, 1950, executed a pronote for Rs. 1,800/- at Nabha in favour of Chet Ram Arjan Das of Delhi. On the 7th of July, 1953, Chet Ram Arjan Das assigned this pronoto to Kahan Singh at Delhi by endorsement and a month later Kahan Singh filed the suit out of which this appeal has arisen for the recovery of Rs. 1,800/-principal and Rs. 300/- interest against Chanan Ram and Chet Ram Arjan Das. The suit was contested by Chanan Ram who inter alia pleaded that the pronote was not properly stamped and cancelled. The trial Court framed a preliminary issue covering this "plea and after hearing arguments decided it against the plaintiff and dismissed the suit. On appeal by the plaintiff the Additional District Judge, by his order dated the 14th February, 1955, set aside the order of dismissal and remanded the case for decision on merits having come to the conclusion that the pronote was properly stamped and cancelled. The defendant Chanan Ram has filed this second appeal against the order of the Additional District Judge, Delhi.

(2.) On behalf of the plaintiff-respondent an objection has been raised that since the order of remand the trial Court has passed a decree in favour of the plaintiff on the basis of the pronote in question and therefore this appeal has become infructuous. There is no force in this objection. Inasmuch as the decree was passed after the remand order and during the pendency of the appeal from that order, it must be taken to be subject to the result of this appeal. If this appeal fails, then the decree is not affected by this appeal. On the other hand, if this appeal succeeds, then the subsequent proceedings would fall with the remand order and would be of no effect, vide Shiromani Gurdwara Prabandhak Committee v Raja Shiv Rattan Dev Singh, (S) AIR 1955 SC 576 (A).

(3.) Now, the pronote bears four revenue adhesive stamps of one-anna each and on each stamp is engraved "Nabha State". All the four stamps are cancelled by the signature of Chanan Ram as Proprietor of the firm Mangal Ram Chanan Ram. The assignment in favour of the plaintiff is at the back of the pronote. Admittedly, the pronote was not stamped at the time of endorsement in the plaintiff's favour.