IABAL MOHAN Vs. PIARA SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is defendants' appeal filed under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for brevity, 'the Code') challenging concurrent findings of fact recorded by both the Courts below holding that the pronote and receipt (Exs. P1 and P2) have been duly proved on record and the theory of obtaining signatures of the defendantappellant on blank paper has not been accepted. The document Ex. DW2/A, dated 2.8.1996, has not been considered sufficient because there is nothing considered relevant in the aforementioned document to conclude that the signatures of the defendant-appellant (now represented by his LRs) were obtained by police pressure or by undue influence. In this regard the statement made by Darshan Singh (DW1) has been cited by the Courts below, who had stated in crossexamination that signatures of defendant-appellant Gurmail Singh were not obtained on blank papers in his presence.

(2.) HAVING heard learned counsel, I am of the view that this Court in exercise of jurisdiction under Section 100 of the Code cannot substitute its opinion in preference to the one preferred by the R.S.A. No. 3277 of 2005 (O&M) Courts below even if another view is possible. Therefore, merely because in document Ex. DW2/A, dated 2.8.1996, some apprehension has been expressed by the defendant-appellant with regard to obtaining of signatures forcibly, no interference on that basis would be called for.