Muttusami Ayyar, J.
1. This case is governed by the decision in Pattat Ambadi Marar v. Krishnan I.L.R. 11 Mad. 290 wherein it was held that an assignment by an agreement in writing of all the assignor’s property, including a promissory note, was held not to be sufficient to sustain a suit by the assignee on the note in the absence of an endorsement. The ground of decision is that a promissory note cannot be negotiated by the mere execution of a deed of assignment. The right of suit did not pass to the plaintiffs by operation of law, for the company of which defendant was a member was wound up, and it is admitted that the plaintiffs’ firm derived its right from assignment by Exhibits B and C. The promissory note purports to be payable to the payee or order, and it is not denied that it is a negotiable instrument. I set aside the decree of the District Munsif, and direct that the suit be dismissed with costs.