:1: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 1774 OF 2008 WRIT PETITION NO. 1774 OF 2008 WRIT PETITION NO. 1774 OF 2008 Sulochana w/o. Laxman Bombale ..Petitioner versus Chintamani Cooperative Credit Society Ltd. & Ors. ..Respondents Mr. A. V. Chatuphale for the Petitioner. Mr. Mohan P. Pawar for the Respondent No. 1. CORAM : S. A. BOBDE, J. CORAM : S. A. BOBDE, J. CORAM : S. A. BOBDE, J. DATE : 20TH AUGUST, 2008. DATE : 20TH AUGUST, 2008. DATE : 20TH AUGUST, 2008. P.C. P.C. P.C. . Heard. 2. The only contention of the petitioner is that the impugned order of the Appellate Court suffers from an error of law apparent on the record, in that it does not record clear and categoric finding that the respondent society disbursed the amount of Rs.1,50,000/- to the petitioner by way of loan. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the main contention of the petitioner was that the amount was never advanced to the petitioner. :2: Earlier, also the petitioner had approached this Court by way of Writ Petition No. 707 of 2007 which was decided on 26.11.2007 and this Court had observed that the Appellate Court had failed to address the main grievance made on behalf of the petitioner that the society had not established the fact of disbursement of the amount of Rs.1,50,000/- to the petitioner. This court therefore remanded the matter. 3. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the Appellate Court has again fallen into the same error by not rendering the clear finding of fact that the society had lent a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- to the petitioner. The submission on behalf of the petitioner is not correct. 4. The Appellate Court has discussed the entire evidence on record oral as well as documentary and has come to the conclusion that the society had disbursed a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- to the petitioner. The Appellate Court has referred to the agreement itself. There is a further reference to letter dated 21.4.2003 wherein the petitioner has admitted that the sum of Rs.1,50,000/- was given as loan. The Appellate Court has observed that no questions :3: have been asked in the cross-examination to the witness of the society in respect of the letter. The Appellate Court has also observed that the petitioner had not made any correspondence or there is any complaint regarding non-payment of the amount from the date of disbursement. Thus, on entire appreciation of the oral as well as documentary evidence, the Appellate Court has come to the conclusion that the amount of Rs.1,50,000/- was in fact disbursed to the petitioner. 5. There is no error of law apparent on the record. There is no merit in the petition, which is hereby dismissed. (S. A. BOBDE, J.) (S. A. BOBDE, J.) (S. A. BOBDE, J.)