(1.) Respondent No. 1 filed a suit for recovery of Rs. 33,535/- against the appellant, a guarantor, and the respondent No. 2 M/s. Vyankateshwar Match Industries, on the allegation that on 21.3.1980 a loan was advanced to respondent No. 2 of Rs. 25,000/-. Ex P. 1 is demand promissory note which was signed by respondent No. 2 and appellant as guarantor. Ex. P.2 a letter of guarantee was also signed by the principal - debtor and the guarantor. The appellant/defendant entered appearance and filed written statement contending that he had not signed the document in the capacity of a guarantor but the Bank has taken his signature on a plain paper in the capacity of witness and therefore, he is not bound to pay for that amount in the capacity of a guarantor.
(2.) Trial Court after appreciation of the evidence decreed the suit hence the present appeal by Guarantor. Appellant has examined himself as witness and has stated that he has not signed the demand promissory note but his name appears in that. He has denied his signature on the letter of guarantee. (Ex.P.2) but has admitted that his name appeared there. Thus, the signature in paper is denied although his case is that he has signed the paper but the signature is in the capacity of witness and not in the capacity of guarantor. The appellant has gone to the extent of denying his signature on the written statement filed by him or on the powers given to his Counsel (Ex. P.3 & 4). The statement of the appellant/defendant does not inspire confidence. Story put forth by him that he was not the signatory to the Ex. PI & P.2 and was not the guarantor of respondent No. 2 also does not inspire confidence. The judgement and decree given by the Trial Court are valid and passed on proper and due appreciation of the evidence on record, and does not require any interference by this Court.
(3.) As a result thereof this appeal is dismissed. The appellant/defendant shall pay the costs of this appeal. Counsel's fee according to schedule, if certified.