BROBBEY J.
The facts which resulted in this case are as follows: The second defendant company offered to buy rice from the plaintiff company by presenting a post-dated cheque in payment thereof. The plaintiff company declined to sell the rice against that post-dated cheque. The second defendant represented the same cheque, but this time with a guarantee written at the back. On the basis of that guarantee, the cheque was accepted by the plaintiff’s and the rice valued at ¢5 million was supplied to the second defendant. The cheque was tendered as exhibit A. The exact words of the guarantee which induced the plaintiffs to accept the cheque were “payment guaranteed.” Below those words appeared the signature of one S.O. Addo, who signed in his capacity as the accountant of the Tema branch of the National Savings and Credit Bank (hereafter referred to as the first defendants). The cheque did not merely bear the signature of the accountant but also had on it the official stamp of the accounta…