Bangarusawmy Aiyangae v. A. R. A. R. S. M. Somasundaeam Chettiar

The question whether when a document which recites that it was executed by A, B and C, is executed by A and B alone, whether in such a case, A and B agreed to be liable under it only if C also joined in executing it is a question of fact, to be decided in the circumstances of each particular case. Sivasami Chetti v. Sevugan Chetti and Krishnamachariar v. Narasimhachariar. In this particular case, the lower Appellate Court has after, considering the circumstanes and probabilities arrived at the conclusion that the 1st defendant (the appellant before us) agreed to be liable under Exhibit A, notwithstanding that one Desikachariar mentioned in the recital as a co-executant did not sign it. Though it must be admitted that the Judgment is not quite satisfactory, we cannot say that there is no evidence on which the lower Appellate Court could have arrived at the conclusion at which it arrived. The plaintiffs' 1st witness says that he made a demand on the 1st defendant for money due under the particular pro-note and that the 1st defendant promised to pay up soon, thus impliedly admitting that this liability under it was not made conditional on Desikachariar's joining in its execution. We are not satisfied that the Subordinate Judge has misconstrued the documentary evidence in any material particular.

We therefore dismiss this Second Appeal with costs.

Appeal dismissed.