1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR. SECOND APPEAL No.143 of 2006. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Office Notes, office Memoranda of Coram Court's or Judge's appearances, Court's orders or directions order and Registrar's order. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= CORAM: C.L.PANGARKAR,J. DATE : 19th December, 2006. 1. Heard Mr.Gopal G.Mishra, the learned counsel for the appellant. 2. A suit for recovery of Rs.45000/- for breach of contract was filed by plaintiff. It is alleged that the plaintiff had purchased a pick-up Van after obtaining the loan from bank. Subsequently, plaintiff handed over the said vehicle to defendant no.1 Prakash who agreed to pay the remaining amount of loan to the Bank. He committed default. The plaintiff was, therefore, required to suffer damages and therefore instituted a suit. The learned trial court found that the defendants were liable to pay Rs.24000/- with 9 % per annum interest. The defendants had preferred an appeal against said judgment and decree, before the Additional District Judge, Khamgaon and the appeal came to be 2 dismissed. It is against th is concurrent finding of facts that this appeal is preferred. 3. I have gone through the judgment of the trial court as well as the first appellate court. I do not see any perversity in the appreciation of the evidence. Since there are concurrent finding of facts and no substantial question of law is involved in the matter, the appeal is dismissed in limine. JUDGE pzc