In the High Court for the States of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh. RSA No.4953 of 2009 (O&M) Decided on July15,2010. Joginder Singh --Appellant vs. Sukhjinder Singh --Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN Present: Mr.Vijay Sharma,Advocate,for the appellant Rakesh Kumar Jain, J, Defendant is in second appeal against the judgment and decree of the Courts below by which the suit for recovery filed by the plaintiff/respondent on the basis of pronote and receipt has been decreed. In brief, the plaintiff filed a suit for recovery of Rs.70,000/- with interest @ 1.5% per month on the basis of pronote and receipt executed by the defendant. The trial Court decreed the suit for recovery of Rs.70,000/- as principal amount along-with proportionate costs and interest @ 12% per annum from the date when it was advanced i.e. 30.1.2002 till the date of decision of the suit and future interest @ 6% per annum from the date of decision of the suit till its realisation. As a matter of fact, the appellant has not framed any substantial question of law as envisaged under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure,1908 (for short,CPC). However, learned counsel for the appellant RSA No. 4953 of 2009 (O&M) -2- has raised a feeble argument that rate of interest is on higher side. I have heard learned counsel for the appellant and perused the record. The submission made by learned counsel for the appellant is totally mis-placed because the plaintiff had prayed for interest @ 1.5% per month whereas the trial Court has awarded interest only @ 12% per annum. In view of the above, I do not find any merit in this appeal and as such, the same is hereby dismissed in limine. No costs. July15,2010 (Rakesh Kumar Jain) RR Judge