ssm sm sm IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL CIVIL CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION SECOND SECOND SECOND APPEAL NO.814 OF 2007 APPEAL NO.814 OF 2007 APPEAL NO.814 OF 2007 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s Orders or directions and Registrar’s Orders Court’s or Judge’s Orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Mr.S.V.Gavand for the Appellants. None for the Respondent. CORAM CORAM CORAM : ANOOP V. MOHTA,J. : ANOOP V. MOHTA,J. : ANOOP V. MOHTA,J. DATED DATED DATED : 23rd April, 2008 : 23rd April, 2008 : 23rd April, 2008 P.C. P.C. P.C. . As the original defendants failed to repay the amount of Rs.50,000/- to the Plaintiff inspite of Demand Notice, as the agreement between the parties could not be fulfilled. The Plaintiffs respondents herein, therefore, referred the suit for recovery of the said amount. 2. After considering the rival pleadings and contentions based upon the repayment and as the defendants failed to prove that they have already returned the said amount to the Plaintiffs and after considering the case of the Plaintiff, the Civil ( 2 ) Judge, Junior Division, Mahad, decreed the suit with costs, with @ 12% interest on 19/11/2003. 3. The Appeal is preferred by the original Defendants. By the impugned judgement, the lower Appellate Court also dismissed the case of the Appellant thereby maintained the order passed by the Trial Court. 4. After hearing the Appellant in view of the findings given below and other facts as recorded above, no case is made out to interfere with the order passed by the Courts below. There is no perversity. There is no questions of law involved in the present case. 5. In view of this, the Second Appeal is dismissed. [ANOOP [ANOOP [ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.] V. MOHTA, J.] V. MOHTA, J.]