65 5i 1 1a Reqular Second ApPeal Noe 2211 of 2010 lOaMl IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB S HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision April Co 2011 1 Reqular Second Appeal Noe 2211 of 2010 1O8Mle 0 BhagwanSingh Appeilant 0 CAO VERSUS I C5 I Smta Shanti Devi and others Respondents Z 2 CORAM HONBLE MRJUSTICE MOHINDER PALe I 1 Whether Reporters of Local papers may be allowed to see the judgment7 Z 2 To be referred to the Reporters or not7 3a Whether the judgmentshould be reportedin the Digest 7 m Presentl MrSP Chahar Advocate 7 Z for the appellant Qm Mr RajeshSheoran Advocate for the respondents MOHINDER PAL 0 The had filed the instant suit against 1 for recovery of Rs36525 the ieee Rs250001 principal amount and Rs115251 as interest as calculated at the rate of 1 50 Olo per cent per month from the dayof accrual till the day of filing of the sui which was decreed Gupta Suruchi 2012.11.16 15: 11 True Scanned Copy Of The Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 16:00 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 66 e ReclularSecond Appeal Noe 2211 of 2010 108M10 by the trial Court vide judgmentand decree dated 1992007 and the plaintiffappellant was held entitied to recovery of Rs65251m from the defendantsrespondents with costs of the suit alongwith future interest at the rate of 9 per cent per annur against the judgmentand decree passed by 1 the trial Court the defendantsespondents went in appeal before 0 the Iower appellateCourt The said appealof the defendantsm 0 respondentswas allowed by the Iower appellate Court vide C5 judgment and decree dated 2582009 thereby setting aside I the judgmentand decree passed by the trial Court and dismissing Ii Z the suit of the plaintiffopellant Hence this regular second Ct appeal by the plaintifappellant After hearing the Iearned counsel for the parties and I r CJOlng throughthe records of the case this appeal deserves to Z be allowed for the reasons to be given hereinafter OO Chandgi Ran predecessoreinwinterest of the mm Z defendantsrespondents who was a Teacher in Government Qm Senior Secondary School and had cordial relations with the Bhagwan Singh had taken a Ioan of Rs250001 from the on 24112002 In this regard Chandgi Ram had written an entry in ah with his Chandgi Rams own handwriting and had promisedto repay the Ioanamount to the plaintiffappellantwith interest at the rate of Rs1 50010 per month The said entry is Exhibit P l and was made by Chandgi Ram in the presence of Khem ChancPW l and Shiv Narain PW1 Chandgi Ram died after obtainingthe Gupta Suruchi 2012.11.16 15: 11 True Scanned Copy Of The Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 16:00 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 67 P e3 Reqular Second Appeal Noa 2211 of 2010 lOSMI0 said Ioan from the When the defendant who are wife and children of ChandgiRam refused to repay the Ioan amount to the plaintifappellant even after a Iegai notice in this regardwas got served upon them by the the instant suit was filed by the plaintifappellant 1 against them defendantsrespondentso In the written 0 statement filed by the defendantsrespondents it was pleadedthat 0 the entry Exhibit P l Ill the Bahi was the result of fraud and I C9 hatched by the against Chandgi I Ram in connivancewith Khem Chand PW l and Shiv Narain Z PW However the defendants failed to produceany evidence r to substantiate the allegationsof fraud and manipulation againstthe plaintifappellant On the other hand the plaintif I appellant besides examining himself as PW21 and examining Z of the writing Exhibit P 10 namely Khem Chand 00 PWl and Shiv Narain PW also examined Shamsher Singh S7 Z Malik Handwriting and Finger Prints Expert PW5 Shamsher SinghMalik PW5 after examining the disputed signaturesof ChandgiRam on the writing Exhibit P l with his signatures on the Attendance Register Exhibit PWA Pay Register Exhibit PIN 418 and Proceedings Register Exhibit PWICI opined that the signatures on writingExhibit P l and Attendance Register Exhibit PWAIA Pay Register Exhibit PWA181 and Proceedings Register Exhibit PW041C1 were of one and the same person 1e Chandgi Ram Attendance Register Exhibit PWAIAI Pay Register Exhibit PWAIB and Proceedings Register Exhiblt Gupta Suruchi 2012.11.16 15: 11 True Scanned Copy Of The Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 16:00 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 68 V A 4 v Reqular Second Aooeal Noe 2211 of 2010 OSMI PWAICO had been provedon record by Rajroop WAI who was a Record CIerk in the Government Senior Secondary School where Chandgi Ram had been serving as a Teacher In the presence of this impeccableevidence both oral and documentary the trial Court was justified in decreeingthe suitof the plaintif r appellant 0 ResuItantIy this appealIS allowed the judgment and U decree passedby the Iower appellateCourt are set aside and I C those of the trial Court are restored However the plaintiff I appellant will be entitled to charge interest on the amount of Z Rs250001 at the rate of 9 per cent per annum from 24112002 Iee the date when the amount in question was borrowed by Chandgi Ram 7redecessornnterest Of the I from the plaintiff tili its actual payment Z m 1 W7 Z C MOHINDER PAL I April 2011e JUDGE 1 ak c8c pr D 1 Gupta Suruchi 2012.11.16 15: 11 True Scanned Copy Of The Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 16:00 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document