Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

14. Lastly, reliance has been placed on a decision of this Court in C. R. P. No. 1620 of 1977 for the proposition that any alteration of the date of an endorsement indicating part payment by the endorser on a promissory note is a material alteration of the negotiable instrument itself, sufficient to render the instrument void under Section 87 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. That was a case where the suit was on a promissory note and it was found, that only one of the co-obligants had really endorsed the part payment made before limitation had set in. The other signature in the endorsement was found to be a forgery. There is no case of part-payment or forgery here, and as already noticed, the claim itself is based not on the promissory note alone, but also on the contract of guarantee. The principle of the decision therefore is inapplicable to the facts of the present case.