IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH R.S.A. No. 3498 of 2007 Date of Decision: 26.5.2009 Darbara Singh through his Special Power of Attorney Manna Singh ...Appellant. Versus Suba Singh ....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL. Present: Mr. Ajay Pal Singh, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. M.K. Singla, Advocate for the respondent. **** AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. The present regular second appeal filed by the defendant is directed against the judgment and decree dated 12.6.2007 passed by the lower appellate Court confirming that of the trial Court dated 18.2.2006 whereby the suit of the plaintiff for recovery of Rs.1,80,000/- along with interest, was decreed. Brief facts of the case are that the plaintiff filed a suit against the defendant for recovery of Rs.2,34,000/-. It was pleaded that on 1.10.2002, the defendant borrowed a sum of Rs.1,80,000/- on interest at the rate of 1.50% per month from the plaintiff and executed the pronote and receipt in token thereof in his favour. The plaintiff requested the defendant to repay the amount in dispute along with interest accrued thereon but he failed to do so which gave rise to the R.S.A. No. 3498 of 2007 -2- filing of the suit. The averments of the plaintiff were controverted by the defendant by filing a written statement. Besides raising various preliminary objections, it was pleaded that he never executed the alleged pronote and receipt and no amount was ever borrowed by him. It was further pleaded that Ram Gopal witness of the receipt used to sell milk to the defendant and there was account regarding sale of milk between the defendant and said Ram Gopal who prepared the false pronote and receipt in favour of the plaintiff in connivance with the witnesses. The other averments made in the plaint were denied and a prayer for dismissal of the suit was made. From the pleadings of the parties, the trial Court framed various issues and on appreciation of the oral as well as the documentary evidence adduced by the parties held that the defendant borrowed a sum of Rs.1,80,000/- on interest at the rate of 1.50% per month from the plaintiff on 1.10.2002 in cash as loan and executed the pronote and receipt in his favour. Accordingly, the trial court vide judgment and decree dated 18.2.2006 decreed the suit of the plaintiff for recovery of Rs.1,80,000/- along with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of execution of the pronote and receipt till the date of filing of the suit and at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of suit till the recovery of the decretal amount. Feeling aggrieved, the defendant took the matter in appeal and the lower appellate Court vide judgment and decree dated 12.6.2007 affirmed the findings recorded by the trial Court and dismissed the appeal. Hence, the present regular second appeal. R.S.A. No. 3498 of 2007 -3- I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have perused the impugned judgments with their assistance. Learned counsel for the appellant made efforts to persuade this Court to come to a different conclusion than that of the Courts below but failed to show any material on the basis of which it could be held that the concurrent findings of fact recorded by the Courts below suffer from any mis-reading or mis-appreciation of the evidence available on record which may warrant interference by this Court in the regular second appeal. The Courts below had concurrently held that the defendant executed the pronote, Ex.P1, and receipt, Ex.P2, in favour of the plaintiff after receiving the amount of Rs.1,80,000/- as loan and did not repay the same. The concurrent findings of fact recorded by the courts below do not call for any interference, particularly when the defendant did not appear as a witness to support his plea that the pronote and the receipt were the forged documents. No question of law much less a substantial question of law arises in this appeal for consideration of this Court. In view of what has been stated above, the present appeal fails and the same is hereby dismissed with no order as to costs. May 26, 2009 (AJAY KUMAR MITTAL) gbs JUDGE