IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. RSA No.2024 of 2008 (O&M) Date of Decision: 12.12.2008. N.F.C. Chemicals Ltd and others ....Appellants Versus M/s Shiv Trading and another ...Respondents CORAM : Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal Present:- Ms.Reeta Kohli, Advocate for the appellants. Mr.Anurag Jain, Advocate for the respondents. RAJESH BINDAL, J. **** C.M. No.10428-C of 2008 Notice in the application for stay was issued for today. Learned counsel for the parties submit that they can address arguments even in the main appeal today only as even for deciding the stay application, the same arguments are to be addressed. Accordingly, with the consent of the parties, the date of hearing in the main appeal is preponed from 19.1.2009 to today and the main appeal itself is taken up for hearing. RSA No.2024 of 2008 (O&M) The defendants are in second appeal before this Court against concurrent findings of facts recorded by both the Courts below, whereby in a suit filed for recovery of Rs. 3,48,633.04 the learned trial Court after examining the evidence led by the parties decreed the same only to the extent of Rs. 2,64,799/- with future RSA No.2024 of 2008 (O&M) -2- interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of filing of the suit till its realization along with costs. This was the basic claim raised in the suit. In appeal before learned lower Appellate Court on this issue learned counsel for appellant-defendants did not raise any arguments to point out any defect in the findings recorded by learned trial Court. In this situation, the findings were confirmed. Before this Court the findings on issue No.2 i.e. as to whether the respondent/plaintiff is entitled to recovery of amount claimed in the suit is sought to be challenged whereas no argument on that issue were raised before learned Lower Appellate Court. The same cannot be permitted as having not been raised before Court below. No substantial question of law arises. The appeal is accordingly dismissed. As there is no merit in the main appeal, even the application for condonation of delay is also dismissed. (RAJESH BINDAL) 12.12.2008. JUDGE Reema