Sundaram Chetty, J.

1. This second appeal arises out of a suit, brought by the plaintiff (respondent) for the recovery of a sum of money alleged to be due to him from the defendant under the pro-note Ex. A. The case set up in the plaint was, that this pro-note was executed in consideration of a sum of Rs. 400 paid to the defendant in cash. That case he failed to make out, and it is clear from the judgment of both the lower Courts that they disbelieved the plaint version as to the form of the consideration, and they have held that the suit pro-note was given in consideration of past cohabitation which the defendant had with a dancing girl named Chinnathayi. In the view that such a consideration for the pro-note is not illegal, a decree has been given in favour of the plaintiff.

2. It is now argued for the appellant, that once the Court below found that the plaintiff failed to prove that the pro-note was supported by consideration as alleged in the plaint, the suit should have been dismissed, without going into the question whether the consideration alleged by the defendant for the execution of the suit pro-note is true and valid. If a strict view of the pleadings is taken, an