TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1937 (11) TMI 7
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s name appears in the handnote as the payee, but the defendant took the plea that the petitioner was a mere benamidar. According to the defendant, the loan was advanced by one Munshi Lal Bhagat who at the time was joint with his brother Earn Prasad Bhagat. He gave to Munshi Lal Bhagat a blank paper, wherein he acknowledged receipt of the loan and liability to repay, which was to be filled up as a ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y on behalf of the plaintiff petitioner argues that it was not open to the defendant to take the objection that the payee whose name appeared in the handnote was a mere benamidar, citing the decision of the Full Bench of the Madras High Court in Subba Narayan Vathiyar v. Ramaswami Aiyar (1907) 30 Mad. 88. He does not accept the findings of the learned Small Cause Court Judge to the effect that the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d to prove these facts and the fact of repayment is certainly open to suspicion. Munshi Lal Bhagat was called to support the statement that it was he who made the original loan, but the person to whom the payment was said to have been made was not examined, and Munshi Lal gave no explanation of why the handnote had been drawn up in the name of the plaintiff and not in his own name. 4. But whether....