The appellants’ father Natesa Gurukkal filed a suit, O.S.No.267 of 1979, for the recovery of a sum of Rs.1,956 on the basis of a promissory note dated 23. 1965, executed by defendant, Ramanatha Rao. The plaint was presented on 1. 1979. The plaintiff pleaded that the defendant is a debtor and claimed exemption under the various Debt Relief Acts. Therefore, according to the plaintiff, the suit presented on 1. 1979 was in time.

2. The defendant contended, that he had completely discharged the amount due under the promissory note, that he was not a debtor within the meaning of those Debt Relief Acts and that the plaint presented on 1. 1979 was barred by limitation.

3. Learned District Munsif, by judgment and decree dated 23. 1981 decreed the suit, holding that the suit was in time, that the plea of discharge had not been established, that the defendant had not proved he was not a debtor and the learned District Munsif did not believe Ex.B-1 to Ex.B-5 filed by the defendant to show that he was an assessee under the Income Tax Act. The defendant preferred A.S. No.23 of 1981 before the Sub Court, Tirupattur. The learned Subordinate Judge did not go into the question whether th