JUDGMENT :- This is an appeal by defendant No. 1 against the concurrent Judgments of both the Courts below decreeing the plaintiffs suit. The plaintiff filed the suit for recovery of a sum of Rs. 1,047 from defendant No. 1 on the foot of a hand-note dated 4-1-46 (Ex. 1). This handnote was executed by defendant No. 1 in favour of defendant No. 2. The plaintiff is the son of defendant No. 2. Defendant No. 2 died during the pendency of the appeal in the Court below and his widow, Mst. Rohini Pandiani, was impleaded as respondent No. 2. Defendant No. 1 is the son-in-law of an agnate of defendant No. 2.

The plaintiffs case was that defendant No. 1 borrowed the sum of Rs. 900 from defendant No. 2 on 4-1-46 and executed the suit-pronote promising to pay on demand. Defendant No. 2 subsequently endorsed this Ex. 1 in favour of his son on 6-9-48 (Ex. 1-A). As defendant No. 1 failed to pay in spite of repeated demands, plaintiff filed the present suit. Defendant No. 2 though served with notice did not appear when the suit was called. Defendant No. 1s defence, however, was that he did not borrow any money from defendant No. 2 and the document, Ex. 1 is not promissory note and further defendant