Second defendant is the appellant. His contention is that he has not signed Ext.A-1 agreement as a guarantor and so he is not liable for any amount due to the plaintiff from the first defendant. It is the case of the plaintiff that the terms of the agreement were reduced to writing and a draft of the agreement to be executed by the defendants was drawn up and approved by both parties and that when the fair agreement was being written up the second defendant left the plaintiffs office stating that he had to attend some urgent business and offering to sign the agreement later. Plaintiff contends that only on account of the guarantee by the second defendant Rs.10,000/- was handed over to the first defendant.

2. Whether the second defendant can be held liable as a guarantor as Fjct.A-1 agreement is not signed by him is the moot point for consideration. To totality of the evidence in the case definitely indicates that the second defendant stood as a guarantor for the performance of the agreement by the first defendant. He cannot wriggle out of the agreement on the ground that he had not signed it. On a consideration of the entire evidence both Courts below held that the secon