( 1 ) J. 1. This second appeal raises an important and difficult question of law. In order to appreciate the question, it is necessary to set out a few relevant facts. 2. The appellant herein had dealings with the respondents. Monies were borrowed by the respondents on khatha and also by pledging gold from time to time. While the pledge transactions carried lesser interest, higher interest was payable on khatha dealings. The case of the appellant is that as a result of an arrangement between the parties, the interest on pledge transactions were carried over to the khatha account and that the respondents were liable to pay higher rate of interest. The appellant produced his account books and examined himself as P. W. 1. He also produced correspondence to show that entries were made in his accounts in accordance with the arrangement. He strongly relied upon a letter written by the respondents dated 26-12-1958 and marked as Ex. A-8 in which it was stated by the respondents that they had also made credit and debit entries in accordance with the appellants letter. The District Munsif of Visakhapatnam accepted the appellants case and decreed the suit. But on appeal, the