KARTAR SINGH SAMA AND SONS Vs. RAJ RANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is defendants' second appeal challenging the judgment and decree of the trial Court dated 5.10.2010 whereby suit of the plaintiff -respondents for recovery on the basis of the pronote and receipt was decreed. Further challenge has been laid to the judgment and decree of the lower Appellate Court dated 4.9.2013 dismissing the defendants' first appeal against the aforesaid judgment and decree of the trial Court.

(2.) SUFFICE it to say that appellants in their written statement have denied the execution of alleged pronote and receipt and further stating that the same is forged and fabricated document. Further objection was taken that appellants have failed to comply with the provisions of Section 3 of Punjab Registration of Money Lenders Act, 1938 and the suit was bad for misjoinder of the parties for the reasons that the partnership firm was dissolved on 31.3.1992 and defendant No.2 had become the sole proprietor of the said firm, after its dissolution and in these circumstances, other defendants could not have been fastened with liability.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the appellants has submitted that following substantial questions of law arise in this appeal: -