RATNAM J.

The Indian Overseas Bank (Salem Main) (hereinafter referred to as "the bank"), the plaintiff in O. S. No. 315 of 1976, Sub-Court, Salem, is the appellant in this appeal. One Appavoo Pillai was the owner of a fleet of buses operating in Salem and Dharmapuri Districts. He died on or about August 17, 1963, leaving a registered will dated March 18, 1957, under which he had made some arrangements for the management of his fleet of buses as well as the division of his properties. Respondents Nos. 1 to 6 in this appeal are the sons of Appavoo Pillai. Respondents Nos. 7 and 8 are the wives of respondents Nos. 1 and 2 respectively. After the death of Appavoo Pillai, the first respondent, one of his sons, who was also appointed as the executor under the will of Appavoo Pillai, entered upon the management of the bus transport business left behind by Appavoo Pillai. For the purpose of payment of taxes on the buses, respondents Nos. 1 to 6 were in need of funds and they approached the bank for financial help to pay off the taxes due to the Government on the buses. The bank sanctioned a cash credit limit of Rs. 2, 00, 000 and the bank was directed by its Cathedral Branch to advance the amounts to the respondents. In order to secure the repayment of advances by the bank to respondents Nos. 1 to 8 jointly, severally or individually up to the sanctioned limit of Rs. 2, 00, 000, respondents Nos. 7 and 8 deposited with the bank certain title deeds relating to the properties owned by them. On July 26, 1973, all the respondents herein, with the exception of the third respondent, executed a promissory note in favour of the bank for a sum of Rs. 2, 00, 000 only agreeing to repay the amount with interest at the rate of 4 per cent. over the Reserve Bank of India official rate of interest with a minimum of 11 per cent. per annum from July 26, 1973, until repayment in full with quarterly rests. On the same day, respondents Nos. 7 and 8 executed a letter referring to the deposit of the title deeds already made by them on July 20, 1973, and stating that the documents had been so deposited with the bank with the intention of securing the repayment to the bank of moneys that are due or that may become due from respondents Nos. 1 to 8 including interest, commission and other banking charges. In view of the execution of the promissory note as well as the deposit of title deeds referred to above, the bank started advancing amounts to the respondents and the first respondent drew the amounts from the bank whenever necessary and the bank had entered the amounts in the accounts kept by it in the regular course of business, debiting interest at the rates agreed. According to the bank, as on December 31, 1975, a sum of Rs. 2, 14, 569.81 was due from the respondents to the bank and the respondents, on April 19, 1976, confirmed by letter the correctness of this amount and also gave a revival letter acknowledging their liability under the promissory note dated July 26, 1973. The case of the bank is that it had been demanding the repayment of the amounts due to it from the respondents and had also issued a notice to that effect on April 17, 1976, but that no payments had been made excepting a sum of Rs. 10, 000 on April 19, 1976, and, therefore, it became necessary for the bank to recover the amounts due from the respondents. It is in this situation that the bank instituted O.S. No. 315 of 1976 praying for the recovery of a sum of Rs. 2, 22, 857.73 by enforcing the mortgage created on July 20, 1973, in its favour by the deposit of title deeds. In the written statement filed by the first respondent, which was adopted by others, while admitting that pursuant to the cash credit facilities to a limit of Rs. 2, 00, 000 extended by the bank, three amounts, namely, Rs. 85, 297.60, Rs. 43, 318.58 and Rs. 35, 179.73 were withdrawn by them on July 26, 1973, July 28, 1973, and August 1, 1973, respectively. It was stated that after taking into account the paym