https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=299784 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. en-us Thu, 23 Nov 1967 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 29 Dec 2021 10:57:08 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=299784 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. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 23 Nov 1967 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=299784