PONNUSAMY Vs. RUKMANIAMMAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE second appeal has been filed against the judgment and decree, dated 08. 02. 2002, passed by the Subordinate Judge, Kallakurichi, in a. S. No. 45 of 1999, confirming the judgment and decree, dated 03. 04. 1998, passed by the Principal District Munsif in O. S. No. 1135 of 1995.

(2.) THE defendant in the suit O. S. No. 1135 of 1995 is the appellant in the present second appeal. THE suit had been filed by the plaintiff for the recovery of a sum of Rs. 8,450/-, based on a promissory note said to have been executed by the defendant.

(3.) BASED on the averments made by the plaintiff in her plaint and by the defendant in his written statement, the trial Court had framed the following issues for consideration: i) Whether the plaintiff is entitled to the suit claim of the principal amount along with interest and costs. ii) Is it true that the defendant had not executed the promissory note, dated 09. 08. 1993, after borrowing a sum of Rs. 7,000/- from the plaintiff. iii) Whether it is correct to state that the making over of the promissory note, on 15. 09. 1995, is false. iv) Whether it is correct to state that the plaintiff had executed a promissory note on 10. 04. 1992 after getting Rs. 5000/- from senthamarai Selvi Kothandaraman and that Kothandaraman had executed it for the interest? v) To what relief the plaintiff is entitled to?