Appeal against a decree dismissing a suit for recovery based on a pronote. The high court held that the lower courts' finding of fact regarding the dispute over money transfer was not a substantial question of law and dismissed the appeal.
Appeal dismissed against decree dismissing suit for recovery of Rs.5900/-.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.
RSA No.350 of 1987 (O&M) Date of decision: 10.11.2009
Daulat Ram
-----Appellant
Vs.
Phul Singh
----Respondent
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL
Present:- Mr. Hitesh Pandit, Advocate for the appellant. None for the respondent.
Adarsh Kumar Goel ,J.
against decree of the courts below dismissing the suit for recovery of Rs.5900/-.
to sign blank pronote as security for running a dairy.
RSA No.350 of 1987 (O&M)
2
Chander Mohan denied having received the payment.
affirmed.
November 10, 2009 (Adarsh Kumar Goel)
‘gs’ Judge
Daulat Ram
Phul Singh
Adarsh Kumar Goel
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
