IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RSA NO.17 of 2007 DATE OF DECISION: January 9, 2007 Darshan Singh ….Appellant. VERSUS Hakam Singh …. Respondent CORAM:- HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE VINEY MITTAL PRESENT: Shri L.S.Sidhu, Advocate for the appellant. Viney Mittal,J.(Oral). The defendant is appellant before this Court. He has concurrently failed before the two Courts below and has challenged the judgments and decrees of the two Courts below whereby the suit of the plaintiff for recovery of Rs.80,260/- has been decreed. The aforesaid claim had been made by the plaintiff on the basis of pronote dated September 13,2000, whereby the defendant had taken a loan of Rs.70,000/- and a receipt in this regard was also separately executed. Both the Courts below, on the basis of evidence available on the record and on the basis of report of Handwriting Expert, had held that the pronote in question and receipt were duly executed by the defendant and the amount of loan of Rs.70,000/- had been obtained by him which had not been repaid. Consequently, the suit of the plaintiff has been decreed by the trial Court and the appeal filed by the defendant has failed before the Appellate Court. RSA NO.17 of 2007 -2- Nothing has been shown that the findings recorded by the Courts below are erroneous in any manner or are contrary to the record. No question of law, much less any substantial question of law, arises in the present appeal. Dismissed. January 9, 2007 (Viney Mittal) KD Judge