CMA Foundation · Fundamentals of Business Laws and Business Communication · Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881
Under Section 5 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, which feature distinguishes a bill of exchange from a promissory note?
A bill of exchange contains an unconditional order, signed by the maker, directing a certain person to pay a certain sum, whereas a promissory note contains the maker's own undertaking to pay. Both must be in writing and for a certain sum.
- AIt contains an unconditional order directing a certain person to pay, rather than a promise by the makerCorrect
- BIt must always be payable on demand
- CIt need not be in writing
- DIt may be made payable only to bearer
Explanation
Section 5 describes a bill as an instrument containing an unconditional order signed by the maker directing a certain person to pay a certain sum. A note instead contains the maker's own promise to pay. A bill must be in writing and may be payable to order or bearer, and time of payment may be specified.
Did you get it right without looking?
One question tells you little. A timed set on Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 shows your real accuracy, how long you take and where you lose marks.
More Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 questions
- B holds a bearer instrument and signs an indorsement reading 'Pay C only'. Which statement is correct under Section 50?
- A cheque issued to Meenakshi Exports is crossed specially to HDFC Bank. Which step may HDFC Bank take under the Act?
- Meera Traders issues a cheque to Kiran Suppliers. The cheque is dishonoured by the drawee bank. Under Section 30, the drawer's liability to …
- A promissory note states the maker will pay Rs. 10,000 to Vikram but specifies no time for payment. Under the Negotiable Instruments Act, 18…
- Rohit receives a cheque crossed generally with two parallel transverse lines. He writes the name of 'State Bank of India' between the lines.…
- Which of the following is a presumption that Section 118 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 makes until the contrary is proved?