MOHANAN M Vs. ANANTHAKRISHNAN S/OTHEETHUNNY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Second Appeal arises from the judgment and decree of learned District Judge, Palakkad in A.S. No.289 of 2008 granting a decree in favour of the respondent, reversing dismissal of O.S. No.187 of 2003 of the court of learned Principle Sub Judge, Palakkad.

(2.) RESPONDENT sued the appellant for realization of Rs.75,000/- with interest at the rate of 12% per annum on the strength of Ext.A1, demand promissory note dated 30.06.2000 (allegedly) executed by the appellant undertaking to repay the said amount on demand with interest. According to the respondent, the appellant borrowed the amount for agricultural operations and executed the promissory note. Demanding repayment of the amount, respondent issued notice dated 04.06.2003 (copy of which is Ext.A2), the issue and service of notice are proved by Exts.A2(a) and A2(b).

(3.) IN appeal at the instance of respondent, the learned District Judge observed that evidence of P.W.1 proved the due execution of Ext.A1. It was observed that failure of the appellant to reply to Ext.A2, notice is a circumstance which corroborated evidence of the respondent as P.W.1. The decision of the trial court was reversed and a decree was granted as prayed for.