IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD WEDNESDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND ELEVEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY SECOND APPEAL No.351 OF 2010 Between: Nannapaneni Anjaneyulu ..... APPELLANT AND Chakiri Bullabai ....RESPONDENT The Court made the following: HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY SECOND APPEAL No.351 OF 2010 JUDGMENT: The plaintiff in O.S.No.316 of 2006 in the Court of Principal Junior Civil Judge, Ongole, is the respondent herein. He filed the suit against the appellant for recovery of a sum of Rs.92,400/-. It was pleaded by the respondent that the appellant borrowed a sum of Rs.60,000/- and executed a promissory note in his favour. He pleaded that though a legal notice was issued on 28.05.2005, the appellant did not discharge the debt. The appellant filed written statement opposing the suit. He pleaded that the promissory note was fabricated and that at any rate, it was not supported by any consideration. The trial Court dismissed the suit through judgment, dated 08.02.2007. Thereupon, the respondent filed A.S.No.103 of 2007 in the District Court, Ongole. The lower appellate Court allowed the appeal through judgment, dated 30.06.2008, by recording a finding to the effect that the appellant herein executed the promissory note. Hence, this Second Appeal. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the respondent. The suit was filed by the respondent herein for recovery of certain amount on the basis of a promissory note, marked as Ex.A1. Though the principal amount was Rs.60,000/-, the trial Court dismissed the suit expressing a view that the signatures on Ex.A1 are not that of the appellant herein. In the appeal preferred by the respondent herein, the lower appellate Court reversed the said finding. During the course of hearing of the matter, it was pointed out that even assuming that the promissory note is proved, the suit stands barred by limitation. When the same is pointed out, the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned counsel for the respondent consulted their respective clients and it is reported to this Court that in case the appellant pays a sum of Rs.60,000/- in full and final satisfaction of the claim, the dispute can be resolved. Today, the learned counsel for the appellant has handed over a Demand Draft bearing No.464764, dated 30.07.2011, to the learned counsel for the respondent, to be passed on to the respondent. In view of the settlement, it is directed that the suit shall stand decreed for a sum of Rs.60,000/- in all without costs, and that with the payment of the amount through the Demand Draft, the decree stands satisfied. The Second Appeal is, accordingly, disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. ___________________________ L. NARASIMHA REDDY, J August 03, 2011 MD HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY SECOND APPEAL No.351 OF 2010 August 03, 2011 MD