Section 118 Presumption Denied Where Promissory Note Execution Was Not Proved and Signature Transplantation Was Found

Where a promissory note was found not to bear the defendant's signature when delivered, it could not be treated as a promissory note in the statutory sense for invoking the Section 118 presumption. The burden remained on the plaintiff to prove execution, but the attestors were not examined and the plaintiff's version was rejected on the evidence. The finding that the signature had been transplanted was treated as a finding of fact, and that factual conclusion was not disturbed in second appeal.

---

---

Issues: Whether the presumption under Section 118 of the Negotiable Instruments Act was available on the facts found, and whether execution of the promissory note was proved.

Analysis: The lower appellate court found that the promissory note did not bear the defendant's signature when it was delivered to the plaintiff. On that finding, the instrument was not a promissory note in the statutory sense so as to attract the presumption under Section 118. The burden therefore remained on the plaintiff to prove execution, but the attestors were not examined and the plaintiff's version was disbelieved. The finding that the signature had been transplanted was also treated as a finding of fact.

Conclusion: The presumption under Section 118 was not available, execution was not proved, and the finding of fact could not be disturbed in second appeal. The appeal failed.

---