Transcription and translation:

Lawyer
Dr. Frederick Elfenbein
Mielec.
Town Court in Mielec
Submitted November 3, 1938


Town court in Mielec.

Reason: Efroim Semmel in Mielec

Defendant: Tomasz Graczyński Cyranka


for 125 zl.

Summons

with an application for an order for payment in a writ proceedings.

Great court

For the purchased bike, the remaining party is liable to the plaintiff a residual amount of 125 zl., already paid for a long time, but despite the reminders not yet compensated.

Proof: attached pages.

The plaintiff requests an order for payment, which states that the defendant must pay the plaintiff 125 zl. within 2 weeks with 8% interest accruing from November 3, 1938 and the cost of the order.
In the event of an objection, he claims that:

1 / pronouncing that the defendant is ordered to pay the plaintiff 125 zl. with 8% from November 1, 1938 and the cost of the dispute.

2 / hearing the case and in his absence, issuing a default judgment in the event of the defendant's failure to appear, giving him the order of immediate enforceability.
Costs are calculated according to prescribed standards.

For the plaintiff:

 
Lawyer
Dr. Fryderyk Elfenbein
Mielec.

[bottom of sheet with handwritten notes]

Transcription and translation:

Lawyer
Dr. Wojciech Weryński
 in Mielec.


To
District Court
 in Mielec.
- - - - - - - - -
Case #404/38

Plaintiff: Efroim Semmel, from Mielec.

Defendant: Tomasz Graczyński in Cyranka, by proxy of Dr. W. Weryński, lawyer in Mielec.

for 125 zl.

OBJECTION
- - - - - - - - - -
/ in the writ proceedings /
of the defendant against the order of the Mielec Town Court of November 5, 1938

(covered) Case #404/38 delivered on 23/11. 1938.
2-fold.
1 annex full

Great Court!

The defendant Tomasz Graczyński hereby objects to the payment order of the Mielec City Court of November 5, 1938 Case #404/38 with the request to set aside this payment order or to dismiss the plaintiff Efroim Semmel with the claim request and to order the plaintiff to pay the costs of the present dispute to the defendant rewritten with a 100% increase in addition to the reimbursement of cash expenses, and for admission of evidence from witnesses Antoni Wanatowicz in Mielec, and Jan Trela from Gliny Małe and the hearing of the parties on the defendant's allegations below.

Substantiation.

In the summer of 1931, the defendant bought a bike from the plaintiff for 375 zl. on account of which he immediately gave the plaintiff an advance of 50 zl. and the rest he repaid in such a way that the plaintiff, with the consent of the defendant and with the consent of the defendants, of the defendant Antoni Wanatowicz and his wife, took over the claimant's claim of 200 zl. due to the payment for carpentry works Wanatowicz carried out for them by the defendant in 1931, at the same time the plaintiff released the defendant from the obligation to the plaintiff for this amount of 200 zl. and finally, as a carpenter master, in 1932 the plaintiff made various carpentry works when renovating his house from his wood material with the help of two journeymen, for which the defendant was entitled to the plaintiff the following mutual claim for a total amount of 159 zl., which the defendant out of simple caution object to a complaint against the plaintiff's claim to the defendant for 125 zl., and this: for completely reworking five windows of 20 zl. each, 100 zl., for repairing 10 windows of 3 zl. each, 30 zl., for repairing 6 doors, 3 zl. each, 18 zl., for repair or polishing of one gramophone - 7 zl., for cleaning one table top by the machine 4 zl., of which it turns out that the defendant actually overpaid the plaintiff, because the defendant paid the plaintiff 409 zl., and the plaintiff's claim was only 375 zl.

In this way, the claimant's claim has long been extinguished by the above payment and also because of the limitation period - especially since the plaintiff from the summer of 1931 and at least from the summer of 1932 absolutely to the claim did not plead with the defendant to pay the plaintiff's alleged claim, and therefore the plaintiff's claim is unfounded.

The defendant denies that he ever accept the plaintiff's claim.

Agent for the defendant Tomasz Graczyński:

Lawyer
Dr. Wojciech Weryński
of Mielec.

[bottom of sheet with handwritten notes]

Transcription and translation:

Case #404/38

Attachment


plaintiff for the report of the report of February 6, 1939 in the case of the lawsuit of Efroim Semmel against Tomasz Wraczyński for 125 zl.


The plaintiff denies the content of the defendant's letter of December 3, 1938 and states that the defendant did some minor repairs at the plaintiff's home but the plaintiff paid him all this because the defendant expressly stated that the remuneration for these repairs must be compensated in cash, because the defendant was not an independent carpenter but worked for carpenter Ryniewicz. The defendant did not make any modifications to the windows, but only minor repairs and it is not true that these repairs cover as many as 15 windows because there are only 18 windows in the whole house of the plaintiff and the defendant repaired only every 3 or 4 windows in the plaintiff's apartment for which the plaintiff paid in cash and the defendant never claimed his salary again.

This claim cannot be time-barred, for he was constantly admonished by the defendant, who constantly assured the plaintiff that as soon as he received the money from America, the contested claim was outstanding and constantly asked for delay and that costs should not be incurred.

in autumn wr.

Last time the defendant acknowledged the contested claim and promised to compensate it in the coming days.

Proof: witnesses N. Rynkiewicz, carpenter, Józef Semmel in Mielec and attached pages.

January 4, 1939 – Notice to appear in court. Full size image.

Transcription and translation:

Lawyer
Dr. Wojciech Weryński
in Mielec.

To Mr.

Tomasz Graczyński

in Cyranka

Mielec, on January 17, 1939.

Dear Sir!

I inform you that in his case against Efroim Semml for payment of 125 zl. a hearing will be held before the local court on February 6, 1939 at 12 o'clock in Room 39 with Case #404/38 and regarding substitution at this hearing, please report to me in advance with appropriate cash.

Regards

Translation and transcription:

Lawyer
Dr. Wojciech Weryński
of Mielec.


To
Town Court
 of Mielec
- - - - - - - - -
Case #404/38

Plaintiff: Efroim Semmel of Mielec.

Defendant: Tomasz Graczyński of Cyranka, by proxy of Dr. Wojciech Weryński, lawyer in Mielec.

for 125 zl.

Great Court!

The defendant Tomasz Graczyński asks for a written justification for the judgment of the Mielec City Court of March 24, 1939 Case #404/38 and to notify him to his representative Dr. Wojciech Weryński, lawyer in Mielec, to appeal against the above judgment.

Agent for the defendant Tomasz Graczyński:

Lawyer
Dr. Wojciech Weryński
of Mielec

Translation and transcription:

Lawyer
Dr. Wojciech Weryński
in Mielec.

To Mr.

Tomasz Graczyński

in Cyranka

Mielec, April 22, 1939

Dear Sir!

In the case of Efroim Semmel against you, the justification for the judgment has already been prepared and in the case of lodging an appeal, please contact me immediately with the amount of 22 zl. 50 gr., and if you accidentally, contrary to my expectations, already made this payment, then only with the amount of 4 zl. for the application with fees for justification of the judgment.

Regards

Lawyer
Dr. Wojciech Weryński
of Mielec

Transcription and translation:

Lawyer
Dr. Wojciech Weryński
of Mielec

To Mr.
Tomasz Graczyński
in Cyranka

Mielec, May 5, 1939

Dear Sir!

Since you are not making an appeal, I am asking you to compensate me for the remaining amount of 4 zl. soon. for announcing an appeal in the matter of your dispute with Semmel, for which repayments cost me 2 zl. for two porters for cards.

Regards

Lawyer
Dr. Wojciech Weryński
of Mielec

Transcription and translation:

Official bill of exchange up to 200 zl. - - Mielec, August 23, 1939 - - For 200 zl. - - on November 22, 1939, I will pay a promissory note for this salt at the request of "Polna" Machine Factory and Iron Foundry Joachim Klagsbald and Sons in Przemyśl, a sum of two hundred zlotys. - - Value in good - - Mr Efroim Semmel Mielec Paid in Mielec - - Efroim Semmel wr. - - In dorso: We give way at the request of Bank Gospodarstwa Krajowego in Rzeszów We received value in the calculation, Rzeszów, on September 4, 1939 "Field" Machine Factory and Iron Foundry Joachim Klagsbald and Sons in Przemyśl J. Klagsbald wr. - - I am giving up at the request of the Municipal Savings Bank in Rzeszów Szuba wr. - - pp. Towarnicki wr. - - On the chord with a stamp: No. prot 7/45 A bill of exchange protest by Leon Grenik, notary public, in Mielec, on the twenty-seventh day of December in the year one thousand nine hundred and forty-five. At the request of the Municipal Savings Fund of the Mielec poviat in Mielec, this promissory note to Efroim Semml as an acceptor here in Mielec to pay the bill amount of PLN 200 zl. I wanted to show it, but I could not do it, because according to a message from the Mielec City Council, he does not live in Mielec, so I did not pay the promissory note currency with this protest: Costs: Fees for protest 2 zl. 50 gr. Total 2 zl. 50 gr. Round seal: L on Grenik - Notary in Mielec. Leon Grenik, notary public. - - - According to the feedback bank of Bank Gospodarstwa Krajowego in Rzeszów of January 19, 1946 1/6% commission by .35 and notification costs 11.60 zl. - - -

Transcription and translation:

Dr. Jan Kubiczek
Lawyer
Rzeszów, ul. Mickiewicza 21
telephone 329.

Free of court fees according to art. 4 clause 1. rules on court costs.
DISTRICT COURT IN TARNÓW
GIVEN DECEMBER 30, 1946

To the District Court
Promissory note application in writ proceedings

Plaintiff: Bank Gospodarstwa Krajowego in Rzeszów, represented by proxy by Dr. J. Kubiczka, lawyer in Rzeszów,

against

Defendants: 1 / from unknown place of residence Efroim Semml, a merchant in Mielec, to set up a guardian ad actum,

2 / the company "Polna" Machine Factory and Iron Foundry Joachim Klagsbald i Sons in Przemyśl ul. Zyblikiewicza 7-11, under the management of the Local Industry Directorate in Rzeszów, to the hands of the Delegation Team of the Prosecutor General's Office in Rzeszów,

for payment of bill of exchange sums in the amount of 2,400 zl. from
With applications for the establishment of an ad actum probation officer for the defendant for exemption of the plaintiff from providing the place of residence for service, and for providing an order for payment with an enforcement clause for security.

4-fold.
11 sheets: 1/ power of attorney
           2/ certificate of the Management Board of M. Mielec
           3/ -11/ nine originals bills of exchange with protests and returnable bills, together with copies.

Your Honor!

Based on the attached 9 bills of exchange with protests and returnable bills, the plaintiff as the legal holder of these bills of exchange has (?) a claim for payment of all bills of exchange totaling 2,400 zl. with 8% interest from January 1, 1942, protest costs in the amount of 28.50 zl., 1/6% commission and notification costs in the amount of 108.60 zl. to all persons obliged from these bills of exchange, which include the defendants 1/ Efroim Semmel as the issuer of own bills of exchange and the defendant 2/ the company "Polna" as a partner.

Proof: attached from 3/ to 11/ original promissory notes with protests and returnable bills and audition with Dr. Teofil Szuba director of the B.G.K. Branch in Rzeszów, ul. Bernadyńska.

According to the certificate of the Municipal Council of Mielec of August 6, 1946 Case #1177/46, the defendant 1/ Efroim Semmel is unknown from where he was.

Proof: attached under 2/ certificate.

In the absence of payment of the claim sought, the plaintiff relies on the provisions of the decree of January 22, 1946 DURP. No. 4 item 32 on the extension of deadlines for bill of exchange law and requests the defendant to be appointed 1/ Efroim Semmel ad actum guardian and for issuing the following bill of exchange against the defendants payment order:

No. I Case #4/46

PAYMENT ORDER

December 31, 1946

The District Court in Tarnów as a result of a lawsuit filed on December 30, 1946 pursuant to art. 469 pursuant to art. 462 of the Code of Civil Procedure. orders the defendants 1/ Efroim Semml, unknown from his place of residence, a merchant in Mielec, acting ad actum in person by Dr. Resler of Tarnów and 2 / the company "Polna" Machine Factory and Iron

Foundry Joachim Klagsbald and Sons in Przemyśl ul. Zyblikiewicza 7-11, under the management of the Local Industry Directorate in Rzeszów, to the hands of the Delegation Team of the Prosecutor General's Office in Rzeszów, to pay jointly and severally to the claimant Bank Gospodarstwa Krajowego in Rzeszów, replaced by the representative of Dr. J. Kubiczka, lawyer in Rzeszów, bill of exchange sums:

400 zl. with 8% interest from January 1, 1942, protest costs 4.50 zl., 1/6% commission 0.70 zl. and notification costs 11.60 zl. 

400 zl. with 8% interest from January 1, 1942, protest costs 4.50 zl., 1/6% commission 0.70 zl. and notification costs 11.60 zl.

400 zl. with 8% interest from January 1, 1942, protest costs 4.50 zl., 1/6% commission 0.70 zl. and notification costs 11.60 zl.

200 zl. with 8% interest from January 1, 1942, protest costs 2.50 zl., 1/6% commission 0.35 zl. and notification costs 11.60 zl.

200 zl. with 8% interest from January 1, 1942, protest costs 2.50 zl., 1/6% commission 0.35 zl. and notification costs 11.60 zl.

200 zl. with 8% interest from January 1, 1942, protest costs 2.50 zl., 1/6% commission 0.35 zl. and notification costs 11.60 zl.

200 zl. with 8% interest from January 1, 1942, protest costs 2.50 zl. 1/6% commission 0.35 zl. and notification costs 11.60 zl.

200 zl. with 8% interest from January 1, 1942, protest costs 2.50 zl., 1/6% commission 0.35 zl. and notification costs 11.60 zl.

200 zl. with 8% interest from January 1, 1942, protest costs 2.50 zl., 1/6% commission 0.35 zl. and notification costs 11.60 zl.

and 370 zl. for legal costs. % gr, within three days of delivery of this order, or within that period they have raised charges against the claimant's claim.

For the Court 

Secretary:

Head of the Secretariat

In addition, the plaintiff claims: 1/ in the event of defendants filing an order to uphold the payment order and for the defendants to be jointly and severally liable for the plaintiff's further costs of the process according to standards prescribed with a 100% increase and cash expenditure,

2/ in the event of a refusal to issue an order for payment to refer the case after the thought of art. 461 of the Code of Civil Procedure. on the way of ordinary proceedings and for ruling by a judgment that the Court awards defendants from

the plaintiff the amount of 2,400 zl. with 8% interest from January 1, 1942, costs of protests in the amount of 28.50 zl., commission 1/6% and notification costs in the total amount of 108.60 zl. and costs of the trial according to the norms prescribed with a 100% increase and cash expenses resulting from the case files.

3/ to conduct a hearing also in the plaintiff's absence,

4/ for issuing a default judgment against the defendants, if the defendants fail to appear at the court session scheduled for the hearing in the case of 2/

5/ for immediate enforceability of the judgment pursuant to Article 355 L.1, 4 and 6 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

6/ for dismissal of the plaintiff pursuant to Art. 145 § 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure. from the obligation to choose a place of residence for deliveries by post,

7/ for providing an extract of the order for payment with an enforcement clause for security pursuant to the provision of art. 463 § 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, i

8/ for granting the plaintiff the following costs of the bill of exchange order for payment:

a / for the stamp for the power of attorney...30 zl.
b / for stationery...25 zl.
c / for filing the claim...15 zl.
d / for the attorney's remuneration in the prescriptive mode with a 100% increase in 300 zl.

Total...370 zl.

Attorney for the plaintiff:

Dr. Jan Kubiczek
Lawyer

Transcription and translation:

January 23, 1947
Case #4/46

Decision.

January 11, 1947

The District Court in Tarnów issues the following verdict:

Judge S.O. Dr. Zeimer

Secretary: Kwasniewicz

after hearing on January 11, 1947, cases brought by Bank Gospodarstwa Krajowego in Rzeszów by lawyer Dr. J. Kubiczka in Rzeszów against the defendants 1) the buyer Efroim Semmel was absent in Mielec and 2) the company "Polna" Machine Factory and Iron Forgery Joachim Klagsbald and Sons in Przemyśl, ul. Zyblikiewicza 7, under the management of the Directorate of the Local Industry in Rzeszów by the Prosecutor General's Office of R.P. for payment of bills of exchange in a total amount of 2,400 zl.  - as a result of Dr Resler brief under Civil Procedure Code Art. 157

Decides:

in place of representative Dr. Resler, we establish in this matter as the representative of Efroim Semmel Dr. Weryński's lawyer in Mielec, which is binding until the party or its representative applies (Article 157 of the Code of Civil Procedure). -

PROPER SIGNATURES ON THE ORIGINAL
COMPLIANCE WITH THE ORIGINAL.

Head of the Secretariat
[signed]

Transcription and translation:

Lawyer
Dr. Wojciech Weryński
Mielec, ul. Hetmańska 32

Posted to the post office in Mielec
on January 1, 1947 - Keep the envelope!

the right of a guardian
free of court fees
/ Art. 3 clause 1 point 2 No. 70
Pos. 382/46 Journal U.R.P./.

To
District Court
 in Tarnów
- - - - - - - - - - -
Case #4/46

Plaintiff: Bank Gospodarstwa Krajowego in Rzeszów, represented by Dr. Jan Kubiczka, lawyer in Rzeszów, ul. Mickiewicza 21.

Defendants: 1/ unknown from the place of residence Efroim Semmel, merchant in Mielec, represented by Dr. Wojciech Weryński, lawyer in Mielec, ul. Hetmańska 32, / paragraph post. S.O. in Tarnów from January 11, 1947. Case #4/46.

            2/ the company "Polna" Machine Factory and Iron Forgery Joachim Klagsbald and Sons in Przemyśl ul. Zyblikiewicza 7-11, under the management of the Local Industry Directorate in Rzeszów, to the hands of the Delegation Team of the Prosecutor General's Office in Rzeszów.

for payment of bill of exchange sums in the amount of 2,400 zl.


Allegations
- - - - - - - -
from Efroim Semmel

against / bill of exchange / order for payment of the Tarnów District Court of December 31, 1946. Case #4/46, served on him January 23, 1947.
3-fold.

Your Honor!

Defendant Efroim Semmel, unknown location, acting through his guardian

Requests:

1/ for the annulment of the bill of exchange order for payment of the Tarnów District Court of December 31, 1946 Case #4/46 and to dismiss the plaintiff with a claim and to order the plaintiff to pay the defendant the costs of the process according to the tariff with a 100% increase and cash expenses

2/ for suspension of immediate enforceability of the above order

3 / and in any case for awarding to the probation officer of the defendant from the plaintiff the costs of this dispute according to the tariff with a 100% increase and cash expenses.

Substantiation.

The defendant's guardian, with simple procedural caution, denies the authenticity of the defendant's signature of Efroim Semmel on all disputed bills of exchange, and also complains that the plaintiff was not entitled to any claim against that defendant, and even if it was accidental that the plaintiff should once have had a claim against the defendant, this claim was long ago by that claimant defendant paid, and finally complains about the statute of limitations for the claim and the bills of exchange themselves.

Proof: bills of exchange at issue and interrogation of the parties, however, the curator waives his interrogation for the lack of direct news.

The guardian justifies the above-mentioned motion for suspending the rigor of immediate enforceability of the above promissory note order for payment by the fact that in the event of failure to abide by this rigor and execution of the enforcement, the defendant could be exposed to a significant and irreparable loss, especially since the defendant as an unknown from his place of stay and unable to thus, he would not be able to prevent various unnecessary enforcement steps and possible auctions for almost nothing to sell the remnants of the defendant's property, who survived the conflagration of war in Mielec.

On behalf of Efroim Semmel:

Lawyer
Dr. Wojciech Weryński
Mielec, ul. Hetmańska 32

Transcription and translation:

General Prosecutor's Office P. Branch in Krakow
Case #2202/47 F.4.

DISTRICT COURT IN TARNÓW
Submitted on January 27, 1947

To
District Court in Tarnów
Case #4/46

Plaintiff: Bank Gospodarstwa Krajowego in Rzeszów by Dr. J. Kubiczka lawyer in Rzeszów

Defendant: 1 / Absent Efroim Semmel, a merchant in Mielec to his representative

2 / The 'Polna' company registered as Machine Factory and Iron Forgery Joachim Klagsbald and Sons in Przemyśl ul. Zyblikiewicza 7, under the Management Board of the Local Industry Directorate in Rzeszów by the Prosecutor General's Office, Rep. of Poland

for payment of bills of exchange total
in the amount of 2,400 zl.

singly
2 attachments

The General Prosecutor's Office declares that by taking over the representation
secondly, he joins the charges brought by
Delegation Team of the Prosecutor General's Office P. in Rzeszów
 by letter of January 9, 1947 Case #196/47 

F. 9/8, and supports these
 allegations in all its extent.

Krakow, January 24, 1947.

Case Counsel            For Branch Manager
Dr. Kazimierz Opałek    Dr. Alfred Kraus

February 1, 1947 –Filing in Tarnów District Court. Front image, back image.

February 8, 1947 – Notice for Dr. Werynski to appear in Tarnów District Court. Full size image.

Transcription and translation :

General Prosecutor's Office P. Branch in Krakow
L.I.5674 / 47 F.4.

To
District Court
 in Tarnów
Case #4/46

Plaintiff: Bank Gospodarstwa Krajowego in Rzeszów by Dr. J. Kubiczka, lawyer in Rzeszów.

Defendant: 1/ Absent Efroim Semmel, a merchant in Mielec to the representative

           2/ The 'Polna' company recorded in the Machinery Factory and Iron Foundry Joachim Klagsbald and Sons in Przemyśl, ul. Zyblikiewicza 7, under the management of the Local Industry Directorate in Rzeszów by the Prosecutor General's Office of the Rzp.P. Branch in Krakow

for payment of bill of exchange sums
in the total amount of 2,400 zl.

PROPOSAL

The General Prosecutor's Office after the secondary company

2 copies

The General Prosecutor's Office declares that at the hearing
on February 20, 1947 it will not intervene -

therefore requests that a hearing be held at
absence of a secondary company and
sending the General Prosecutor's Office the case file after
hearing for a short time to review.

Krakow, February 15, 1947
Case officer            For the branch manager
Dr. Kazimierz Opałek    Dr. Alfred Kraus

March 22, 1947 – Notice from Dr. Werynski to appear in Rzeszów District Court. Full size image.

April 4, 1947 – Notice from Dr. Werynski to appear in Rzeszów District Court. Full size image.

April 28, 1947 – Notice from Dr. Werynski to appear in Tarnów District Court. Full size image.

Transcription and translation:

Case #4/46

JUDGMENT.

In the name of the Republic of Poland!

May 22, 1947

District Court in Tarnów in the following composition:

Chairman:  Vice President S.O. Kukulak
Judges:    Vice President S.O. Jurasz
           S. Gr. Błotnicki

Reporter: Wozniak

after hearing on May 22, 1947 a lawsuit filed by Bank Gospodarstwa Krajowego in Rzeszów against 1) Efroim Semmel, unknown from where he was staying 2) Company of the "Polna" Reg. Machine Factory and Iron Foundry Joachim Klagsbald and Sons in Rzeszów for payment of bills of exchange:

upholds in full legal order the order for payment of the District Court in Tarnów of December 31, 1946 Case #4/46 and orders the defendant jointly and severally to pay the plaintiff the costs of 130 zl. as further costs.

SUBSTANTIATION.

Against the order for payment of December 31, 1946 issued on the promissory note claim, they filed charges as the defendant, both the curator of the unknown from the place of residence of Efroim Semmel, and the General Prosecutor's Office under the name of the "Polna" Machine Factory and Iron Foundry company Joachim Klagsbald and Sons in Przemyśl.

The representative of Efroim Semmel specifically alleged:

the inauthenticity of Efroim Semmel's signature on all disputed bills of exchange
, payment of bill of exchange sum,
 limitation of claims and bills of exchange themselves.

The General Prosecutor's Office accused:

that the signature 'J. Klagsbald "on bills of exchange is inauthentic; on the bill of exchange from Mielec August 23, 1939, amounting to 200 zl., only the company sound is mechanically impressed, while on two further contested bills of exchange from Mielec August 23, 1939, 200 zl. everyone, there is an illegible signature under the wording of the company "Polna", not from any of the persons authorized to substitute the company. The defendant company "Polna" has been taken over by the State, and therefore the bill of exchange commitment as well as any other does not charge you.

The court finds that the defendant 1) has not proved his first two allegations at all, because the representative himself has no news in these directions and for this reason,

by renouncing even his interrogation, he emphasized that these allegations are made only with caution.

Since the claims covered by the contested bills of exchange did not expire until August 25, 1939, also the third complaint is no longer based in the Act itself, since pursuant to Art. 1 decree of January 9, 1947 Journal Of Laws No. 5 item 24, their limitation period was suspended until December 31, 1947.

Interviewed as a plaintiff, Teofil Szuba, director of the B.G.K. Branch in Rzeszów he testified firmly that under the name of the company "Polna" he was authorized to sign or either Joachim Klagsbald, or Eng. Szymon Klagsbald. Thus, the contested bills of exchange No. 1 and 2 were signed by Joachim Klagsbald, and bills of exchange No. 3 to 9 by Szymon Klagsbald. The plaintiff states the identity of these signatures on the disputed bills of exchange by comparison with the original Klagsbald signatures on other documents with further comparison and with the specimen signatures shown in the commercial register of the Regional Court in Przemyśl No. I 2 K.H A I.163. The attached promissory note No. 5 is signed by Szymon Klagsbald. The last plea is based on an inaccurate interpretation of the law on taking over the ownership of the basic branches of the national economy. Since the defendant, the record company "Polna", passed to the State under the provisions of the Act of January 3, 1946 Coll. No. 3, item 17 - it is wrong to view the defendant that, pursuant to Article 6 of the aforementioned Act, he would be free from all encumbrances and obligations. Since in this case, the plaintiff is Bank Gospodarstwa Krajowego, the bill of exchange commitment of the acquired company is one of those exceptions referred to in the cited art. 6 when calculating the privileged and challengeable liabilities due to the creditor.

For these reasons, the Court pursuant to Art. 465 of the Code of Civil Procedure the order for payment was upheld and the costs of the dispute were adjudicated according to art. 101 of the Code of Civil Procedure -

PROPER SIGNATURES ON THE ORIGINAL
COMPLIANCE WITH THE ORIGINAL.

Head of the Secretariat