As per case facts, the plaintiff filed a suit for recovery of an amount lent to the defendant based on a promissory note. The defendant denied executing the note and ... disputed his signatures. The plaintiff presented attesting witnesses and a scribe to prove the document, while the defendant submitted a handwriting expert's report stating the signatures were not his. The lower courts discarded the expert's report, compared the signatures themselves, and decreed the suit in favor of the plaintiff. The defendant appealed to the High Court, challenging these findings. The question arose whether the lower courts correctly assessed the evidence, particularly by discarding expert testimony and relying on their own comparison of disputed handwriting, and whether the document was sufficiently proven. Finally, the High Court, after reviewing legal principles for proving disputed handwriting, upheld the lower courts' decision, finding their reasoning for comparing signatures and accepting witness testimonies to be sound, and dismissed the appeal as it raised no question of law.