Balbir Singh (Deceased) Through ... vs Lachhman Sharma
2022 Latest Caselaw 14683 P&H

                         IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH
                       Sr. No.: 111
                                                Regular Second Appeal No.206 of 2022 (O & M)
                                                           Date of Decision: November 18, 2022

                       Balbir Singh (since deceased) through LRs
                                                                                ..... APPELLANT(S)
                                                        VERSUS
                       Lachhman Sharma
                                                                            ..... RESPONDENT(S)

                                                           ...

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA ...

PRESENT: - Mr. Nand Lal Sammi, Advocate, for the appellants.

. . .

Tribhuvan Dahiya, J (Oral)

This is defendant's regular second appeal against the

concurrent findings recorded by both the Courts below.

The facts in brief are, respondent-plaintiff filed a suit for

recovery claiming that the appellant-defendant (since deceased, through

LRs) had obtained a loan of ` 5 lac from him on 17.12.2008 by executing a

pronote and a receipt, which was duly witnessed by Navneet Singla and

Mehar Singh. The defendant agreed to pay interest at the rate of 1.56% per

month, but the plaintiff has claimed interest at the rate of 1.50% per month,

i.e., 18% per annum.

Both the Courts below based on the evidence led, have

concurrently held that the pronote as well as the receipt have been duly

proved on record. Even the thumb impressions of the defendant on the

pronote, Exh.P1, and receipt, Exh.P2, have been established by examining a

Hand Writing & Finger Prints Expert. The plea of forgery taken by the

defendant also stands falsified from a report of the Assistant Manager, AVIN KUMAR 2022.11.24 09:15 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.t RSA No.206 of 2022 [2]

Forgery Detection Cell for General Manager, India Security Press Nashik

Road. The report dated 28.04.2017, stated that two Indian revenue stamps,

Exh.P3 and Exh.P4, pertained to the year 1997 and four Indian revenue

stamps, Exh.P1 to Exh.P2, Exh.P5 and Exh.P6, pertained to the year 2002.

Therefore, there was no basis for the defendant to take the plea that the

pronote and receipt were forged. The other plea taken by the defendant

regarding financial incapacity of plaintiff to advance the loan has also been

dis-proved on record. The plaintiff has examined Pavittar Singh, Clerk,

Oriental Bank of Commerce, as PW-4, who has proved the plaintiff's

statement of account, Exh.P5, to the effect that the latter withdrew an

amount of ` 2.5 lac from his account on 17.12.2008, when the loan in

question was advanced to the defendant.

The aforesaid findings recorded by both the Courts below do

not suffer from any error of law nor any could be pointed out by the learned

counsel. No substantial question of law arises for consideration.

Dismissed.

Since the main petition itself stands decided, all pending

applications, if any, are disposed of as having been rendered infructuous.

                                                                       (Tribhuvan Dahiya)
                                                                             Judge
                       November 18, 2022
                       avin




                       Whether Speaking/ Reasoned:                         Yes/ No
                       Whether Reportable:                                 Yes/ No
AVIN KUMAR
2022.11.24 09:15
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this
order/judgment.t