Answer this please Now only itself..

Nishu · 20 Aug 2024

Yes , this can be treated as a material alternation . According to the section 87 of the negotiable instrument act 1881 any alternate in the instrument which changes its legal character or effect is considered a material alternation added a word' on demand 'of change the time of payment of the promisery note which is a material term . Therefore. It is a material alternation . Ans 2. No . Shreya is not a holder in due course . To be holder in due course a person must be have taken the instrument for value and in good faith Shreya recieved the check as a gift , which means she did not give. Any consideration for it . Therefore she is not considered the holder in the due course .