The Calcutta Weekly Notes Law Notes and Notes of Cases of the Calcutta High Court and of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council and the English Law Courts Monday June 28 1909

The head mohurrir of the Treasury received the cheque after it was passed bye the accountant took the Plaintiff’s siguature in a receipt book in anticiption of payment and told the Plaintiff to apply a little later to the poddar for the money. [...] It was found that this was false and that the poddar and the mohurrir misapprpriated the money the value of the cheque by practising fraud upon the Plaintiff. [...] The question was whether the Plaintiff was entitled to get the value of the cheque from the District Treasury on the ground that he was defrauded by its employees. [...] IN DECIDING THE QUESTION THEIR LORDSHIPS seemed to think that this was a question as to when the fraud of an agent would bind the pricipal and their Lordships proceeded to determine whether the fraud committed by the poddar and the mohurrir was committed in the course of their employment and for the benefit of the Treasury. [...] When the customer endorsed over the cheque to the Bank or when the payee of the Treasury-cheque made it over to the Treasury eployees and signed the receipt book at their request but received no money for it the Treasury like the Bank continued to be a debtor to the payee till the money was paid to him.