S VALAYAPATHY Vs. G BERNARDSHA SAMUEL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Appellant/Defendant has filed the instant Second Appeal as against the Judgment and Decree of the First Appellate Court, viz., the Second Additional Sub-Court, Tirunelveli, dated 08.09.2005 in A.S. No. 197 of 2005, in reversing the Judgment and Decree, dated 28.02.2005, in O.S. No. 393 of 2004, passed by the Learned Principal District Munsif, Tirunelveli.

(2.) The First Appellate Court, viz., the Second Additional Sub-Court, Tirunelveli, while passing the Judgment in A.S. No. 197 of 2005, dated 08.09.2005, has inter alia observed that PW-1, G.Bernardsha Samuel and PW-2, Peer Mohammed, have been examined to establish the execution of suit pronote Ex. A-1, and there is no necessity to examine the witnesses mentioned in suit pronote as per Section 68 of the Indian Evidence Act 1872 and has come to a resultant conclusion that the Appellant/Defendant has not proved that he has not received the loan from the Respondent/Plaintiff and further that the Respondent/Plaintiff has proved his case and consequently, allowed the Appeal by setting aside the Judgment and Decree of the Trial Court, dated 28.02.2005, in O.S. No. 393 of 2004 and decreed the suit as prayed for in the plaint together with costs.

(3.) Before the Trial Court, in the main suit two issues have been framed for adjudication. On behalf of Respondent/Plaintiff, witnesses PW 1 and 2 have been examined and Ex. A-1 to A-5 have been marked. On behalf of Appellant/Defendant, DW-1 has been examined and no document has been marked.