AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Krishnaswami Aiyar, J.—The suit is on a pronote and not for the original consideration, the balance of purchase-money. Yarlagadda
Veeraragavaya v. Gorantla Ramaya 29 M. 111 : 15 M.L.J. 484, has, therefore, no application. The defendant admitted liability on the note but
pleaded discharge. The discharge was not gone into. The question, however, is whether the plaintiff is entitled to a decree. It has been held in
Chenbasappa v. Lakshman Ramchandra 18 B. 369 and that decision is quoted with approval in Thaji Beebi v. Tirumalaiappa Pillay 30 M. 306 :
17 M.L.J. 308, that even where the defendant admits liability, the unstamped pro-note is acted upon if a decree is given in accordance with it. That
Section 35 of the Stamp Act prohibits. I feel bound by the decision. I dismiss the petition with costs.