The petition is against the order of the learned Subordinate Judge, who restricted the scope of the decree to be passed against the first defendant to the extent of only Rs.260 as against the claim of the petitioner in the sum of Rs.429-8-0, which was the amount due on a promissory note. In the first instance, the learned District Munsif held that the promissory note was not supported by consideration and, therefore, he dismissed the suit as against the first defendant, and gave a decree against the second defendant only, the assignor of the promissory note in favour of the plaintiff. On appeal by the plaintiff, the learned Subordinate Judge found that the promissory note was supported by consideration; but while giving a decree against the first defendant, he found that only Rs.260 had been paid by the plaintiff and that the plaintiff would be entitled to recover only that amount under the suit promissory note. He believed the evidence of D.W.‘s 3 and 4 in this matter, and then found that though the plaintiff stated in his chief examination that he had paid Rs.400 for the assignment of the promissory note in his favour, it was not proved that he had paid that amount, but