MIYAN BUX Vs. MASAMMAT BODHIYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a reference by the Munsif of Fatehpur under Order XLVI, Rule 1. He has referred two suits, one No. 350 and one No. 310. The Munsif himself states that in Suit No. 350 an appeal will lie, and there is, therefore, no power in him to make the reference. But in Suit No. 310 no appeal lies, and it was open to him to make the reference, and we have to entertain it. Notices have been served on the parties and nobody appears.

(2.) The learned Munsif states the question referred as follows: Whether a promissory note made payable to bearer on demand offends (against) the provisions of Section 25 of the Indian Paper Currency Act X of 1923? Is such a promissory note void and inadmissible in evidence and cannot be the basis of a claim in any Court of Law?

(3.) He states that promissory notes payable to bearer on demand are a common form of promissory note occurring in the District of Fatehpur, and that "at least about 100 of such promissory notes are the basis of suits pending in his Court.