CSA 490/09 Prakash Mathur Vs. Ram Murti Mishra (1) In the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan At Jaipur Bench, Jaipur J U D G M E N T In S.B. Civil Second Appeal No.490/2009 Prakash Mathur Vs. Ram Murti Mishra Date of Judgment :: 26th August, 2009 P R E S E N T Hon'ble Mr. Justice Jitendra Ray Goyal Mr. N.K. Singhal, for appellant. ....... By the Court :- This is defendant's second appeal under section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure against the concurrent judgment and decree dated 21/7/2009 passed by Additional District Judge No.1, Bharatpur in Regular Civil Appeal No.1/2007 whereby he affirmed the judgment and decree dated 6/11/2006 passed by Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division) No.2, Bharatpur by which suit of the respondent-plaintiff for recovery of money along with interest has been decreed. 2. Heard learned counsel for the appellant on the point of admission and perused the judgments of the courts below. 3. The case of the plaintiff is that the defendant borrowed a loan of Rs.25,000/- from the plaintiff on 26/7/1997 at the interest rate of 24% per annum with the stipulation to CSA 490/09 Prakash Mathur Vs. Ram Murti Mishra (2) repay the said amount within a period of three months and to this effect the defendant also executed an agreement on the stamp paper of Rs.5/- in the present of the witnesses but after lapse of the stipulated period the defendant did not repay the loan. The defendant while admitting the fact that a sum of Rs.25,000/- was advanced to him by the plaintiff having executed the agreement, came out with a case that the loan amount of Rs.25,000/- advanced to the defendant has been adjusted against the consideration of plot of land which was sold by the defendant to the plaintiff on 30/5/2000. 4. The trial court on the basis of the pleadings of the parties framed issues and after recording the evidence and hearing the parties decreed the suit of the plaintiff and directed the defendant to repay the loan amount of Rs.25,000/- to the plaintiff with interest at the rate of 12% per annum from 26/7/1997. The appeal preferred by the appellant-defendant was also dismissed by the first appellate court. Hence, this second appeal by the appellant-defendant. 5. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and perused the impugned judgments of the courts below. 6. This appeal arises out of the money decree passed by the trial court and confirmed by the first appellate court. The case of the defendant-appellant was not found proved that the loan of Rs.25,000/- along with interest has been CSA 490/09 Prakash Mathur Vs. Ram Murti Mishra (3) adjusted when plot of land was sold to the respondent-plaintiff by the appellant-defendant in the year 2000. Having considered the rival submissions made at the bar and gone through the impugned judgments of the courts below, I do not find any illegality or impropriety in the conclusion arrived at by both the courts below on the facts. No substantial question of law arises in this second appeal. Therefore, this appeal is liable to be dismissed at the admission stage. 7. Consequently, this appeal along with stay application is dismissed at the admission stage. (J.R. Goyal),J. VS Shekhawat/- Jr. P.A. D73