ORDER :

Lalitha Kanneganti, J.

1. Challenging the decree and judgment dated 23.8.2017 in OS No. 88 of 2012 on the file of Senior Civil Judge, Chirala, Prakasam District, the appellants-defendants have preferred the appeal.

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties in this appeal are referred to as they are arrayed in OS No. 88 of 2012.

3. The case of the appellants is that the plaintiff filed the suit in OS No. 88 of 2012 on the basis of 59 promissory notes allegedly executed by one Gutti Nageswara Rao, who is the husband of the 1st defendant and father of defendants 2 to 4. The said Gutti Nageswara Rao failed to repay the amount due to the plaintiff and he died intestate on 10.11.2011 leaving the defendants 1 to 4 as his legal heirs. Thereafter when the plaintiff informed the defendants 1 to 4 about the amount due to him from Gutti Nageswara Rao and demanded them to repay the same, they promised to discharge the debt, but they did not keep up their promise and postponed the same on one pretext or other. As such the plaintiff is constrained to file the suit for recovery of amount on the foot of promissory notes.

4. The defendants filed their written statement denying the execution of