Appeal against civil decree on a promissory note claimed to be forged was dismissed as factually untenable, with interest rate reduced from 9% to 6% per annum.
Appeal dismissed; interest on decree reduced from 9% per annum to 6% per annum.
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
R.S.A.No.2361 of 2007 (O&M)
Date of decision : 10.2.2010
Vijay Kumar
....Appellant
Versus
Pawan Kumar Goyal
...Respondent
CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MAHESH GROVER
Present : Mr. Ashok Jindal, Advocate for the appellant.
Mr.Pankaj Jain, Advocate with Mr.D.K.Goyal, Advocate for the respondent.
MAHESH GROVER, J.
This appeal is directed by the defendant against the judgments passed by the learned trial court dated 29.8.2005 and that of the first Appellate Court dated 12.4.2007.
In a suit for recovery of Rs.2,82,500/- on the basis of pronote, both the courts returned a finding regarding the validity of the same and decreed the suit of the plaintiff/respondent. The appellant, who is the defendant, had denied the existence of pronote and pleaded that the same was a result of forgery, but no such evidence was adduced by him. He has also pleaded that the plaintiff/respondent was a money lender but he failed to discharge this onus as well. In such an eventuality the courts observed that
R.S.A.No.2361 of 2007 (O&M) -2-
according to the provisions of Section 118 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, the presumption of truthfulness of a document is though rebuttable but was not rebutted by any cogent evidence on record, whereas to the contrary the plaintiff/respondent proved the document as also the passing of the consideration. These are pure questions of facts which have been determined by the courts of law. No substantial question of law has been shown to have arisen in the present appeal which is totally devoid of any merit and is dismissed. However, the interest granted @ 9% per annum is slightly exorbitant
and accordingly the same is reduced to 6% per annum.
With the aforesaid modification the appeal stands
dismissed.
10.2.2010 (MAHESH GROVER) JUDGE dss
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the evidence regarding forgery of the pronote was sufficient to rebut the presumption under the Negotiable Instruments Act.
Whether the interest rate granted at 9% per annum was excessive.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Vijay Kumar
Pawan Kumar Goyal
Mahesh Grover
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
