JUDGMENT :

1. The 1st defendant before the trial Court, who lost his defence before the Courts below, filed this appeal under Section 100 of C.P.C. questioning the correctness of concurrent judgments of the lower Courts.

2. The 1st respondent herein was the plaintiff before the trial Court. The 2nd respondent herein was the 2nd defendant in the suit. O.S.No.4 of 1996 was filed by the plaintiff as against two defendants. The suit was disposed of by the learned Senior Civil Judge, Gudivada. The suit was on a pronote and it sought for recovery of money. The pleaded case of the plaintiff was that on 01.01.1993 defendant Nos.1 and 2 together borrowed an amount of Rs.60,000/- from the plaintiff and executed a demand promissory note agreeing to repay the debt with 24% interest per annum as and when demanded. Thereafter, despite demands, there was no repayment and therefore, the suit.

3. The 2nd defendant did not choose to appear and contest and was set ex parte before the trial Court. Even thereafter, he never participated in the legal process. It was the 1st defendant, who raised a contest by filing a written statement and subsequently an additional written statement. His defence was tha