KONG YEE LONE & CO Vs. LOWJEE NANJEE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The respondent in this appeal, who is plaintiff in the original suit, sued the defendants, now appellants in the Court of the Recorder of Rangoon for the recovery of mom? secured by two promissory notes. The plaintiff is a rice-trader carrying on business under the firm of Robert Sutherland & Co. in Rangoon. The defendants carry on business with other persons under the firm of Kong Tee Lone as rice-millers, general merchants, and commission agents.

(2.) The notes sued on are in the form following:

(3.) The defendants pleaded that the character signed to the notes indicates not their firm, hut somebody or something else; and. farther that the dealings on which the notes are founded were effected between the plaintiffs and one Kaim Chew, who, though a partner, was not the manager of the firm and had no authority to bind it. A large part of the controversy in the Court below and at this Bar related to these two defences. Their Lordships will not discuss them further now. One turns on the niceties of Chinese handwriting; and the other on a variety of circumstances adduced to show the position of Kaim Chew in the defendants, firm. Both have been ruled by the learned Recorder in favour of the plaintiff, and at the close of the argument their Lordships were clear that the evidence fully justified his rulings.