JOHN THANGADURAI Vs. ARUL AZIR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The defendants have directed this second appeal as against the concurrent findings rendered by the trial Court as well as the first appellate Court with regard to Ex.A.1 promissory note.

(2.) The respondent/plaintiff in O.S.No.78 of 2000, on the strength of Ex.A.1 promissory note dated 25.05.1997, sued the defendants, in the Sub-Court, Ambasamudram, since inspite of Ex.A.2 notice, either the principal or the interest has been paid. Before the trial Court, plaintiff let in primary evidence by examining himself as P.W.1 and the attestor as P.W.2. The trial Court appreciating the oral and documentary evidence, on 03.10.2003, decreed the suit as prayed for. As against that the defendants have approached the first appellate Court/Principal District Court, Tirunelveli in A.S.No.125 of 2004 but met with a failure on 31.01.2005, thus, this second appeal.

(3.) Mr.S.Kumar, learned counsel for the appellants argued at length questioning the geninuneous and want of proof of execution of Ex.A.1. When we look at the substantial question of law framed, such argument now will not arise, so we shall confine ourselves to the substantial question of law framed.