JUDGMENT

Anil R. Dave, J.—

1. Leave granted.

2. Being aggrieved by the dismissal of Second Appeal No.587 of 2008 by the High Court of Andhra Pradesh, the defendant (appellant herein) has filed this appeal.

3. For the sake of convenience, parties to the litigation have been described as arrayed in the trial court.

4. The suit had been filed by the plaintiff (respondent herein) for recovery of Rs.1,90,000/- from the defendant, who is the appellant herein, with interest and the claim was based on a promissory note, which was alleged to have been executed by the defendant for Rs.1,25,000/-.

5. The trial court dismissed the suit in the circumstances stated hereinbelow:

6. The case of the plaintiff was that a sum of Rs.1,25,000/- had been borrowed by the defendant and the defendant had, therefore, executed a Promissory note for Rs.1,25,000/- on 18th September, 2001. In spite of demand, as the amount was not repaid, the plaintiff was constraint to file Original Suit No.933 of 2003 for recovery of the said amount along with interest thereon.

7. The case of the defendant was that though the Promissory note had been executed by him, no amount was payable by the defendant to the plaintiff. A