AIR 1923 Lah 638; Braj Kishore Ditsht v. Purna a ss Kishore Dilsitv, Pan 358 ¥ i: =n substance of a claim ThE only by the ice of defect sory note, in which the 44 by A and delivered to B and ora pays the amount due on te note to B and thereafter B 1 soe he brother C and with his full knowledge that instrument had oe rged iners the rame of the later in he blank there and completes ‘not be liable on the instrument to C he cannot be said ait fact been alleged in a case it cannot be'said that the Weng defence whatsoever and that they should not be given an ‘establishing the allegation of fraud.* "a forged endorsement is a nullity and consequently there is no question ‘fa subsequent holder being a holder in due course.” cheque is written by some person other than signatory, then fo of the same we can refer to Praveen Metal Agencies Bangalore VIM, Balasubramanyané where it was held mae (A) Negotiable Instruments Act (25 of 1881), section 9—Holder in dive cers Requirement of being possessor fr consideration —Possessor ff cheques having prior transactions with party indorsing cheques in” his favour—Party in whose favour cheques were indorsed having. _gome amount de f him for patty indorsing cheques on date of indorsement—Conclusion is warranted that possessor came to be in ‘Scanned with CamScannerThe appellant was entitled to be a decree an the promissory note, since ‘he had proved satisfactorily the endorsement in his favour, and he had become the holder in due course ‘Section 10. Payment-in due course—"Payment in payment in accordance with the apparent tenor of the faith and without negligence to any person in posse Circumstances which do not afiord a reasonable ground isnot entitled to receive payment of the amount therein mi (CL BE Acts. purports to be indorsed tin due course ‘or exclude further negotiation.’ 78 Comp Cas 616. oachimsonv. Sus Bank Coronation, (193 . Cheque payable to order—(1) Where a cheque payable to order by or on behalf ofthe payee, the drawee is discharged Where a cheque is originally expressed to be payable to bearer, the discharged by payment in due course to the bearer thereof, tanding any indorsement whether in and notwithstanding that any such i ICL-B. of Ex. Acts 60 and 1 of the Cheques Act, 1957] by the Negotiable Instruments (Amendment {order on demand, p bank is discharged by p ic sment on which alteration is not opp of exchange or cheque has been ma, tson or banker from ail liability thereo stich payment shall not be questioned by reason of the instriment havi | beenlaltered, of the cheque crossed. ICLB of Ex. Act, s.64(1) and 7) Section 118 is a product of English Law and as has been stated in Officis Receiver v. Abdul Shakur,* the special rules of evidence mentioned in the ‘section have to be inten« le instrument as consideration cannét avail against the receiver of the nota prostdig between the heslen andi roving creditor but as one between the creditors represented by the offic Tie end the bain earth ald at en when he eo ‘ ICE. B.of Bx. Act s. 6 1. AIR 19658920: (1965)1.5CR 254, 2 Vasu v. Saye Yasen Sifuddin Qadri, AIR 1987 AP 139 (DB). 33 of the Provincil | ‘Scanned with CamScannermer have ben forged the ba nake good the loss caused to the customer and the ler a necessary or a proper party TWENTY SIX ete cting Banker ery Pa proceeds to the customer's account he acts as aj seth couse ‘Scanned with CamScannerdishonor | yened thoy y been opened thoy Me 10 the cheque proves defective —The wiker woul would be lable not incur any Lia 8. To the true owner. ‘means the person entitled to enfora the time of the alleged conversion, ‘Says, The assumption ofthis duty ane I 3% pat of the price paid by the banker ld amount to eonvers —The payee of a cheque is ability toa fOr protection under ‘statute the ‘Scanned with CamScanner‘where a customer ass his banker to forwied 3 cheque or bill toa saher for ellction, the latter may nat be treated sss sebagent bat an Spent of the customer. Thus, if A asks B hank to collect 2 cheque through C ‘bank, B bank will not be liable to A for Cbank’s negligence or 6. Notice of dshonour.—Ik any cheque received for collection is di ‘notice of dishonour to the customer according, legotiable Instruments Act, 1881 which states that when a ‘Scanned with CamScannerinstruments in q «case would be apy collecting them in the ca they were denied that si Exchange Act, 1882 of 5 a result of which in the case of the banker has a right to debit the of ja, ave stated tha the proceeds should be sent to the custorner ai the atlest. One way of payment to the customer is by crediting, the account of Rigeustomer as soon as the chequeis received, pad by the collecting bank. In the customer so likes, the amount maybe sect asqper the directions 1. (1962) AN ER 949, ‘Scanned with CamScanner