KOMARAPU DURGARAO Vs. SEEPANA THRINADHAMMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Civil Revision Petition is directed against the judgment made in S.C. No. 5/93 on the file of District Munsif, Amadalavalasa.

(2.) THE defendant in S.C. No, 5/93 is the revision petitioner. The respondent -plaintiff instituted the suit for recovery of a sum of Rs. 2,720/ - on the strength of promissory note dated 21.7.1990. The case of the respondent -plaintiff is that the revision petitioner -defendant borrowed a sum of Rs. 2,000/ - from the respondent -plaintiff on 21.7.1990 promising to repay the amount with interest @ 12% per annum and since the revision petitioner -defendant failed to repay the same, the suit was instituted. The revision petitioner -defendant had filed a written statement and contended that he had never borrowed the amount and the husband of the respondent -plaintiff one Laxminarayana and himself were managing a chit fund unit and he used to collect the money from the chit fund unit and hand over the same to the husband of the respondent -plaintiff monthly once and as a security suit promissory note was executed and at the time of execution of the promissory note attestors were not present and no consideration was paid relating to suit promissory note. The parties for the sake of convenience will be referred to as plaintiff and defendant hereinafter.

(3.) HEARD both the Counsels.