Venkataramana Rao, J.

1. The suit is upon a promissory note dated 27th June, 1923. The question is whether it is barred by limitation. On the 27th March, 1926, a payment of Rs. 85 towards interest was made on the back of the note and on the 23rd July, 1928, a promissory note (Ex. B) was executed in favour of the plaintiff for Rs. 200. It is alleged by the plaintiff that the said promissory note was towards a portion of the interest due under Ex. A. It has been found concurrently by both the lower Courts that the said promissory note was executed only towards interest due under Ex. A and therefore the suit claim is not barred by limitation and decreed the plaintiffs claim. In second appeal it is contended for the defendant that the view of the lower Courts is wrong. It is urged before me by Mr. Periasami Gounder that the suit promissory note, Ex. B, does not refer to the suit debt at all but purports to be for cash received and that it does not appear from the note that the said sum of Rs. 200 was paid towards interest and therefore the conditions of Section 20 are not fulfilled. Payment may be made in any form and a promissory note can be given by way of payment. Under the p