JARMAL SINGH Vs. GURTEJ SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The defendant has filed the instant Regular Second Appeal (RSA) against the decree for recovery of amount in a suit based on promissory note, passed by the trial Court which was affirmed in first appeal.

(2.) It was averred by the respondent that the appellantdefendant borrowed Rs. 1,13,400/- on 22.12.2007 and he executed a promissory note, Ex. PW-1/B, and receipt, Ex. PW-1/C, in favour of the respondent agreeing to pay interest @ 2.5% per mensum. The document was scribed by Zorawar Singh document writer. The appellant received the amount from respondent in the presence of Kundan Singh and Hardev Singh, attesting witnesses to the receipt, Ex. PW-1/C. The amount was not returned despite repeated demands and service of notice dated 11.02.2009. The suit for recovery was instituted before the trial Court on 04.03.2009.

(3.) The appellant pleaded that he borrowed an amount of Rs. 45,000/- from respondent in the year 2005 but could not return the money. Again the respondent got signatures of the appellant on blank papers alleging that this is the renewal of previous transaction. The appellant, however, returned Rs. 33,000/- from time to time. However, on 22.12.2007, the respondent again obtained signatures of the appellant on blank promissory receipt. Replication was also filed.