Satish Kumar Mittal, J.

1. Defendant Jit Singh has filed this Regular Second Appeal against the judgments and decree passed by both the courts below, whereby suit of the respondent-plaintiff has been decreed for the recovery of Rs. 99,000/- along with interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of execution of the pronote Ex.P1 and receipt Ex.P2 till the date of decree and at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of decree till the realization of the principal sum.

2. In this written statement, the appellant-defendant took the stand that he neither borrowed any amount from the respondent-plaintiff nor executed any pronote and receipt in his favour. It was averred that the alleged pronote and receipt are forged and fabricated documents, which do not bear signatures of the appellant-defendant. It was also pleaded that plaintiff Jagroop Singh (now deceased) was not in a position to lend such a huge amount to the appellant- defendant.

3. Both the courts below have recorded a finding of fact that the plaintiff has duly proved the execution of pronote Ex.P1 and receipt Ex.P2 by examining PW.1 Surinder Kumar, Document Writer, who has categorically stated that after receiv