:1: 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 APPELLATE JURISDICTION SECOND APPEAL NO.63 OF 2008 Shri.Sanjay D. Jagtap. ..Appellant. Vs. Smt. Anandibai R. Salokhe and ors. ..Respondents. Mr.V.B. Rajure for the Appellant. CORAM : R.S. MOHITE, J. DATE : 28th April,2008. P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. This is the second appeal filed by the original plaintiff against the dismissal of his suit for specific performance of an agreement of sale dated 10.9.2003. Both the courts have recorded a concurrent finding that there was no agreement of sale. The Trial Court accepted the defendants case that no monies were paid and that under pretext of making some revenue entry blank stamp of Rs.50/- was taken. The Trial Court held that on the face of the document, it is suspicious. I have perused the document in question. I find that the Trial Court has correctly recorded that the area of the land alleged to be sold is shown on the upper margin of the second page of the agreement. Apart from that the document mentions that out of the total consideration of Rs.1,30,000, an amount of Rs. 1,00,000/- has been paid by way of earnest money on the date of the agreement and from time to time before the :2: agreement. No dates of any such payments are contained in the document. Even the plaint is vague about the date of any payments said to have been made earlier. No receipts are produced by the plaintiff in his evidence to indicate any such earlier payment. The contention that the payments must have been made on trust is unbelievable. Both the courts below find that the document in question was suspicious and have refused to grant the prayers. On this finding of fact, no substantial question of law arise in the appeal. Hence, appeal is dismissed. ( R.S. MOHITE, J. )