JUDGMENT

Huluvadi G. Ramesh, J.— This is an appeal by the plaintiff aggrieved by the order of dismissal passed by both the Courts below in the suit filed by the appellant in OS No. 220/1998 and in RA No. 47/1999 by orders dated 30.7.1999 and 7.9.2000 respectively.

2. The appellant had filed a money suit for recovery against the respondent before the Trial Court based on the pro-note. According to the appellant/plaintiff, defendant/respondent had borrowed a sum of Rs. 10,000 on 28.6.1996 and Rs. 20,000 on 10.10.1996 from the plaintiff by executing on demand promissory notes. He had agreed to pay interest at rate of 24% p.a. The defendant had paid only Rs. 5,000 on 28.7.1998 and failed to pay the remaining amount. A suit was filed for recovery of the money and the same was contested by the defendant by denying the same. The Trial Court has raised as many as six issues casting the burden on the plaintiff to prove that whether the defendant had borrowed the amount of Rs. 10,000 and Rs. 20,000 on 28.6.1996 on 10.10.1996 respectively by executing promissory notes. In this regard, evidence was let in and the Trial Court after considering the material on record, in a detailed order, has