IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYNA AT CHANDIGARH. RSA 620 of 2010 Date of decision:- 28.4.2011 Ranbir Singh Petitioner vs. Mohinder Singh Respondent Present: Mr. Satish Goel, Advocate. M.M.S.BEDI,J. The suit of the plaintiff- respondent for recovery has been decreed on the basis of pronote Ex.P1 and receipt Ex. P-2. A concurrent finding of fact has been arrived at by the courts below that the defendant- appellant had borrowed a sum of Rs.50,000/- from the plaintiff- respondent against a pronote Ex.P1 and receipt Ex.P2 had been executed. Counsel for the appellant has contended that there has been fabrication of the pronote and that a sum of Rs.5000/- has been converted to Rs.50,000/-. The said plea has been raised by the appellant before the courts below. The courts below on scrutiny of the evidence have appreciated the evidence fairly to arrive at a conclusion that it is a sum of Rs.50,000/- and not Rs.5,000/-, which is mentioned in the pronote. No ground is made out for interference in the concurrent finding of fact arrived at by the courts below determining the liability of the defendant-appellant on the basis of pronote. No substantial question of law is involved. Dismissed. April 28 ,2011 ( M.M.S.BEDI ) TSM JUDGE