https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=281791 Section 46 of the Provincial Insolvency Act, 1920 was treated as an equitable rule for mutual adjustment of debts, and the defendant was entitled to invoke set-off based on mutual dealings even in a civil proceeding on a promissory note. The court also held that the plaintiff, as assignee of the note, was not a holder in due course because he took the instrument with knowledge of its security character and surrounding insolvency-related circumstances. That notice was sufficient to defeat holder-in-due-course protection, so the plaintiff could not override the defendant's set-off defence. en-us Tue, 19 Nov 1957 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 06 Jul 2019 17:41:21 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=281791 Section 46 of the Provincial Insolvency Act, 1920 was treated as an equitable rule for mutual adjustment of debts, and the defendant was entitled to invoke set-off based on mutual dealings even in a civil proceeding on a promissory note. The court also held that the plaintiff, as assignee of the note, was not a holder in due course because he took the instrument with knowledge of its security character and surrounding insolvency-related circumstances. That notice was sufficient to defeat holder-in-due-course protection, so the plaintiff could not override the defendant's set-off defence. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 19 Nov 1957 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=281791