Patanjali Sastri, J.

1. The only question raised in this second appeal relates to the respondents claim to relief under the Usurious Loans Act, 1918, as amended by the Usurious Loans (Madras Amendment) Act, 1936.

2. The respondents who own extensive garden lands and coffee plantations in the District of Madura had dealings with the appellant, a money-lender and commission agent at Dindigul, from 1927. There were settlements of account from time to time at varying intervals at which interest was calculated at twelve per cent. per annum and added to the principal then due, the composite sum thereafter bearing interest at the same rate. At one of such settlements which took place on 22nd February, 1933, the amount due to the appellant was fixed at Rs. 17,000 and a promissory note for that sum was executed by the respondents. There were no further advances after that date but some repayments were made. On 30th November 1935, the balance due was settled at Rs. 21,375 for which another promissory note was given in discharge of the earlier note. On 15th March, 1937, the respondents sold certain immovable properties to the appellant for Rs. 20,000 out of which Rs. 19,500 was adjusted