PRANJIVANDAS JAGJIVANDAS MEHTA Vs. CHAN MAH PHEE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Their Lordships think it unnecessary in this case to call upon learned counsel for the respondent. They are of opinion that the judgment of the Chief Court of Lower Burma appealed from is correct.

(2.) The rights of the parties have to be determined, in their Lordships opinion, by a written agreement, which is, in their Lordships view, the limit and standard fully measuring the obligations of Mah Saw, who obtained an advance of 13,000 rupees from the respondent on the Ist June, 1906.

(3.) On that date there was a notandum put upon the back of a promissory note then granted, and the notandum is to this effect: "As security, grant of a house in 14th Street, Rangoon." Their Lordships take no stock of an alteration made after that notandum was signed, by which there was an interpolation of the words " Strand Road and," which words would have, in appearance at least, extended the scope of the -V security from " a house in 14th Street, Rangoon, to " a house in Strand Road and 14th Street, Rangoon." Had-an argument been raised as to whether, this alteration having been made, any rights in law could now be founded upon this document, that argument would have been considered: but it is unnecessary to make any pronouncement upon this topic, and accordingly their lordships deal with the document signed by Mah Saw on the Ist June, 1906, as definitely limiting and describing the scope of the security. It was a "grant," in the singular "of a house," in the singular "in 14th Street, Rangoon."