Operation of law governs promissory note rights on partition, allowing enforcement without endorsement or assignment.

A promissory note allotted to a member at an oral partition in a joint Hindu family is enforceable by that member without endorsement or a separate deed of assignment, because the right devolves by operation of law rather than by transfer between parties. The Negotiable Instruments Act was treated as governing negotiation, not excluding transmission of title where rights pass otherwise. Partition was held not to be a transfer within the Transfer of Property Act, so no endorsement or written assignment was required for enforcement.

---

---

Issues: Whether a promissory note allotted to a member of a joint Hindu family at an oral partition can be enforced by that member without endorsement on the note or a deed of assignment.

Analysis: The reasoning distinguished transfer by act of parties from devolution by operation of law. The Negotiable Instruments Act was treated as dealing with transfer by negotiation, but not as excluding transmission of title where rights devolve otherwise by operation of law. The authorities on partition in a joint Hindu family were examined and it was held that partition does not amount to a transfer within the meaning of the Transfer of Property Act. The allotment of the note at partition was therefore treated as a result of the legal change in status and possession, not as a transfer requiring endorsement or a written assignment under Section 130 of the Transfer of Property Act.

Conclusion: A member to whom a promissory note is allotted at an oral partition in a joint Hindu family can sue on the note without endorsement or a separate deed of assignment, because the right devolves by operation of law.

---