1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR. SECOND APPEAL No.518 of 2006. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Office Notes, office Memoranda of Coram Court's or Judge's appearances, Court's orders or directions order and Registrar's order. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Mr.A.V.Bhide,Adv.for the appellant. CORAM: C.L.PANGARKAR, J. DATE : 4th October, 2006. 1. Heard Mr.Bhide, the learned counsel for the appellant. 2. The appellant/plaintiff had instituted a Civil Suit No.169 of 2002 for specific performance of contract to purchase the field belonging to the defendant. It was agreed that the defendant shall sell his field to the plaintiff for consideration of Rs. 30,000/- and the plaintiff paid an earnest amount of Rs.7000/- to the defendant. The defendant refused to perform his part of contract, hence suit was instituted. 3. The defendant had resisted the suit on the 2 ground that the agreement of sale, in fact, was not to be acted upon and submitted that he had obtained loan of Rs.5000/- from the plaintiff. Along with interest he agreed to repay Rs.7000/-. 4. The learned lower court framed several issues and held that it was not an agreement of sale and defendant had obtained loan and as such directed the defendant to repay Rs.7000/- to the plaintiff and rejected the prayer of the plaintiff for specific performance of contract. 5. The appellate court also concurred with the findings recorded by the learned judge of the trial court. 6. Mr.Bhide, the learned counsel for the appellant, contends that there was no proper appreciation of the evidence and in fact, therefore, the courts below have recorded perverse findings. He particularly submitted that in the notice issued by the defendant to the plaintiff, it is mentioned that the defendant was in need of money on 28th September, 2001 while the agreement was executed in the month of November, 2005 and as such there is no nexus between them and this fact itself is enough to say that the findings of the lower court are perverse. His submission has no force. After having 3 gone through the judgment of lower court and decision rendered by the appellate court, I do not find that there is any perversity in the appreciation of the evidence. Therefore, it has to be said that there is no substantial question of law involved. Appeal is, therefore, summarily dismissed. JUDGE pzc