In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh. R.S.A.No.3262 of 1987 Decided on 05.4.2011. Arjan Singh --Appellant vs. Mahan Singh (dead) through LRs --Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN Present: Mr.H.P.S.Gill,Advocate,for the appellant None for the respondents. Rakesh Kumar Jain,J: (Oral) The defendant is in second appeal against the judgment and decree of both the Courts below by which suit for recovery filed by the plaintiff on the basis of pronote has been decreed. In brief, averments made in the plaint are that on 05.6.1982, the defendant had borrowed a sum of Rs.4300/- in cash from the plaintiff with interest @ ` 2% per month against a pronote and receipt, which was not returned despite request. In the written statement, the defendant/appellant denied the execution of pronote and receipt and alleged that they have been forged. On the pleadings of the parties, issues were framed and the Courts below have found that pronote and receipt were duly executed. In this second appeal, learned counsel for the appellant R.S.A.No.3262 of 1987 -2- submitted that the plaintiff has not proved the source from where he had brought the money which is allegedly paid to him at the time of execution of pronote. I am not impressed with the arguments raised by the learned counsel for the appellant as he could not make out any question of law much-less substantial as envisaged under Section 100 of CPC. Hence, this appeal is found to be without any merit and the same is hereby dismissed. 05.04.2011 (Rakesh Kumar Jain) RR Judge