NAGENDRA PRASAD SINGH, J.

1. The plaintiff is the appellant. The suit in question had been filed on behalf of the plaintiff for realisation of a sum of Rupees 2431/- being the principal alone with interest. The claim was based on a handnote executed by the father of the defendants, Nand Kishore Kanth, in favour of the plaintiff for the amount which had been advanced by the plaintiff in past.

2. According to the plaintiff, the executant had taken a sum of Rs. 1801/- for meeting certain necessities and when he was unable to return the said amount, he executed the handnote in question on 17-8-1961 and agreed to pay interest at the rate of one per cent per month. The executant however died on 7-8-1963 leaving behind the defendants as his heirs.

3. Defendants 1 to 3 contested the suit, and inter alia, denied that their father took a sum of Rs. 1801/- or any amount at any time from the plaintiff. They also denied that any such handnote was executed by their father in favour of the plaintiff. According to them, the document in question is a forced and fabricated one and without any consideration. One of the pleas which was taken on their behalf is that defendant No. 4, who was the