Gurmukh Singh Vs Jaswant
Kaur
J U D G M E N T
Markandey Katju, J.
1.
This
appeal has been filed against the judgment and order dated 11.8.2003 in R.S.A.
No.1069 of 2002 of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh.
2.
Heard
learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
3.
The
plaintiff-appellant had filed a suit for recovery of Rs.2,31,000/-. He claimed
that the defendant had executed a pronote and receipt dated 2.5.1994 whereby
the defendant had borrowed a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- from the plaintiff and
agreed to repay the same along with interest @ 2% per annum on demand. Since
the defendant had not paid the aforesaid amount, the suit was filed.
4.
The
defendant-respondent contested the suit and denied the execution of the pronote
and receipt in favour of the plaintiff. She alleged that the aforesaid pronote
and receipt were forged and fictitious documents.
5.
The
trial court on the basis of evidence found that the pronote and receipt were executed
by the defendant in favour of the plaintiff. However, the trial court rejected the
plaintiff's claim by holding that the said documents were not duly stamped as required
under the provisions of Indian Stamps Act. It was found by the trial court that
the stamps which were affixed on the pronote were removed from another document
and affixed on the said pronote.
6.
The
first appellate court and the High Court have agreed with the view of the trial
court. Thus all the three courts below decided against the appellant.
7.
The
findings of the courts below are findings of fact and we cannot interfere with
the same in this appeal. The finding is that the stamps which have been affixed
were removed from other documents, and hence, it has rightly been said that
such a pronote cannot be taken into consideration.
8.
Thus
there is no force in this appeal and it is dismissed. No costs.
...................................J.
(Markandey Katju)
...................................J.
(Gyan Sudha Misra)
New
Delhi;
April
04, 2011
Back
Pages: 1 2
