''Promissory note''
Section 4 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 deals with ''Promissory note''. A "Promissory note" is an instrument in writing (not being a bank-note or a currency-note) containing an unconditional undertaking, signed by the maker, to pay a certain sum of money only to, or to the order of, a certain person, or to the bearer of the instrument. The Act came into force on 01 Mar 1882.
A "Promissory note" is an instrument in writing (not being a bank-note or a currency-note) containing an unconditional undertaking, signed by the maker, to pay a certain sum of money only to, or to the order of, a certain person, or to the bearer of the instrument.
Illustrations
A signs instruments in the following terms:
(a ) "I promise to pay B or order Rs. 500."
(b) "I acknowledge myself to be indebted to B in Rs. 1,000, to be paid on demand, for value received."
(c) "Mr. B, I O U Rs. 1,000.
(d) "I promise to Pay B Rs. 500 and all other sums which shall be due to him."
(e) "I promise to Pay B Rs. 500, first deducting thereout any money which he may owe me."
(f) "I promise to Pay B Rs. 500 seven days after my marriage with C."
(g) "I, promise to Pay B Rs. 500 on D's death, provided D leaves me enough to pay that sum."
(h) "I promise to Pay B Rs. 500 and to deliver to him my black horse on 1st January next."
The instruments respectively marked (a) and (b) are promissory notes. The instruments respectively marked (c), (d), (e), (f), (g) and (h) are not promissory notes.
Section 4, The Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (Act 26 of 1881).
Cross-references
Extracted from the operative text of the enactments themselves. Every destination below exists in our corpus.
Referred to by 1
Related judgements & precedents
These are some judgments that construed this section, and hold precedence value. They hold authority on how to read, interpret and use this section.
-
Pradeep Kumar vs Post Master General
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
When a negotiable instrument (including Kisan Vikas Patras) is presented for encashment at a post office, the post office must verify that the person presenting the instrument is the 'holder' as defined under Section 8 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, by following the prescribed rules and procedures including verification of identity slip and obtaining written application from the actual holder. Payment made to a person in possession of the instrument but not entitled to receive payment in his name is not a valid discharge under Section 78 or Section 82(c) of the NI Act. Such payment constitutes negligence and violates the requirement of 'payment in due course' under Section 10 of the NI Act. The post office is vicariously liable for fraudulent acts of its employees committed during the course of employment, and such liability cannot be avoided by claiming that the employee acted in individual capacity or that the fraud was committed by a third party.
On this section: Defines 'Promissory note' - KVPs are promissory instruments as they contain an unconditional undertaking to pay a certain sum of money
-
Punjab & Sind Bank vs Vinkar Sahakari Bank Ltd.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
A Pay Order issued by a bank is a cheque within the meaning of Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, and the holder of such Pay Order has the legal standing to file a criminal complaint for dishonour. The fact that the drawer and drawee are the same banking institution does not prevent the instrument from being a cheque when held by a third party. The holder is presumed to be a holder in due course under Section 118(g) unless the contrary is proved, and such presumption cannot be rebutted at the stage of quashing the complaint but only during trial.
On this section: Definition of promissory note; court examined whether Pay Order could be classified as promissory note but found it did not meet the definition
-
C.venkatesan vs K.thiruvanavukkarasu
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Where the executant admits signing a blank stamped paper which was afterwards completed as an on-demand promissory note, Section 20 comes into play, execution stands proved and the presumption of consideration under Section 118 follows; having signed the blank paper, he cannot then plead material alteration.
On this section: Directly construes the 'unconditional undertaking' requirement of Section 4 and reverses the first appellate court's holding that the recital made the instrument a conditional and therefore invalid promissory note.
The holding above is the ratio decidendi as extracted from the judgment by eCourts India, reproduced unaltered — it is a rendering of the court's reasoning, not a substitute for its words. Read the order itself before relying on it.
Judgments citing this section
These may be obiter dicta or a precedent, for you to study. These are the judgments where this section is quoted.
-
… Adverting to the contention raised by the learned counsel for the defendant, the questions arise for consideration are: 1) Does Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 mandate attesting witness to a promissory note? 2) What are the essentials of a promissory note? 12. While answering these questions, reference to Section 4 of the N.I Act is apposite. Section 4 of the NI Act is as under: "A 'Promissory note' is an instrument in writing (not being a bank-note or a currency-note) containing an unconditional undertaking signed by the maker, to pay a certain sum of money only to, or to the order of, a certain person, or to the bearer of …
Questions about Section 4
What have the courts held on Section 4 of the Negotiable Instruments Act?
Pradeep Kumar vs Post Master General (07 Feb 2022) is the leading judgment on this section among those set out below: Defines 'Promissory note' - KVPs are promissory instruments as they contain an unconditional undertaking to pay a certain sum of money. Another 2 judgments on this section are set out below, 2 of them from the Supreme Court. They run from 2001 to 2022.
How do I find court cases under Section 4 of the Negotiable Instruments Act?
In judgments and charge sheets this section is written several ways, and each form finds a different set of orders. These search the full text of every order eCourtsIndia holds, best matches first: NI Act 4, section 4 NI Act, section 4 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. People searching for it also type ni act 4 5 6 and negotiable instrument act 4. Each opens the full list of orders on eCourtsIndia, where it can be narrowed by court, year and outcome. 3 reported judgments on this section are set out on this page, beginning with Pradeep Kumar vs Post Master General (07 Feb 2022).
What should I read with Section 4 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, and has it changed?
1 other provision in this corpus refers back to it.
When did Section 4 of the Negotiable Instruments Act come into force?
Section 4 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, cited as NI Act 4, came into force on 01 Mar 1882, having been enacted on 09 Dec 1881. It is in force as at the date shown on this page.
Other sections of this Act
- 138. Dishonour of cheque for insufficiency, etc., of funds in the account312 words
- 142A. Validation for transfer of pending cases299 words
- 143. Power of Court to try cases summarily297 words
- 143A. Power to direct interim compensation291 words
- 142. Cognizance of offences290 words
- 141. Offences by companies287 words
Source and method. Compiled from the enactments of Parliament and of the State legislatures as published on India Code, and republished together with commentary and other original matter under section 52(1)(q)(ii) of the Copyright Act, 1957. Structured, cross-referenced and maintained by eCourtsIndia. Text as in force on 14 Oct 2026. This page is not a substitute for legal advice.