The appellant is the defendant in O.S.No.206 of 1985 on the file of the Subordinate Judges Court, Sankari. The respondent herein is the plaintiff in the said suit for recovery of Rs.65,900.

2. The plaint averments are that on 26.11.1981, the defendant borrowed a sum of Rs.50,000 as loan from the plaintiff for his family expenses, and executed a promissory note promising to pay the said sum with interest at 18% p.a. either to the plaintiff or to his order on demand. It is stated that the defendant has not paid any amount either towards the principal amount or towards the interest in spite of demands, and even after issue of notice and hence the suit was filed for recovery of the suit promissory note debit.

3. Thecase of the defendant is that it is not correct to state that the defendant had borrowed Rs.50,000 from the plaintiff on 26.11.1981 and according to him, on 13.10.1980, he borrowed a sum of Rs.25,000 only from the plaintiff and left with him a signed blank promissory note, without filling up the date and consideration. According to the defendant, the plaintiff had fabricated the suit promissory note and hence it is a forged document. The defendant has also stated t