IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. R.S.A. No.3479 of 2009 (O&M) Date of Decision: 27.4.2010 Harbans Singh. ....... Appellant. Versus Jay Aar Trading Co.(Regd.) and another. ....... Respondents. CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MAHESH GROVER .... 1. Whether Reporters of Local Newspapers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? .... Mahesh Grover,J. C.M.No.10757-C of 2009 Allowed as prayed for. C.M.No.10758-C of 2009 The application is allowed and delay of 6 days in the refiling of the appeal is condoned. R.S.A.No.3479 of 2009 & C.M.No.10759-C of 2009 A suit for recovery was decreed against the appellant. His appeal before the first appellate Court also failed resulting in the filing of the instant Regular Second Appeal. C.M.No.10759-C of 2009 has been moved for staying the operation of the impugned judgments during pendency thereof. R.S.A.No.3479 of 2009 (O&M) -2- .... Learned counsel for the appellant has contended that the findings recorded by the Courts below are perverse and, therefore, are liable to be set aside. I have thoughtfully considered the aforesaid contention and have perused the impugned judgments. The appellant had denied the existence of any liability and also denied that he had ever taken any loan from the plaintiffs-respondents. It was the pleaded case of the appellant. He had also denied that he was selling crops to the respondents and that he had borrowed a sum of Rs.70,500/- from them on different dates. He alleged that fraudulent entries were made by the respondents in their office record on the basis of which a false suit was instituted. Both the Courts below recorded a finding that bahi entries (rokar accounts book) were valid and duly accounted for by the appellant, who had appended his signatures thereon. The appellant has not been able to explain as to how his signatures appeared on the acknowledgements of such entries which he claimed to be fraudulent. There are no specifics of fraud nor there is any evidence to substantiate such a plea which is contrary to the settled principle of law that a person, who pleads fraud, must establish it. In view of the above, when the bahi entries specifically records the amounts borrowed by the appellant from the respondents which entries are having corresponding signatures of the appellant, I am of the view that the findings of fact recorded by the Courts below cannot be faulted with, R.S.A.No.3479 of 2009 (O&M) -3- .... especially when there is no substantial question of law arising in the appeal. It is also to be noticed that a legal notice was served by the respondents upon the appellant to which he did not respond, implying thereby that his defence was an after-thought. On 29.1.2010, when the matter came up for hearing, this Court had granted some time to the counsel for the appellant to seek instructions as to whether the matter can be settled or not. Today when the case was taken up, the counsel for the appellant contended that there is no scope for settlement. Having regard to the aforesaid, the appeal is held to be without any merit and is dismissed. April 27,2010 ( Mahesh Grover ) “SCM” Judge