R.S.A.No.355 of 2008 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH R.S.A.No.355 of 2008 Date of Decision : 11.09.2009 Pardeep Kumar ...Appellant Versus Kamlesh Kumar and another ...Respondents CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA Present: Mr. B.R.Mahajan, Advocate, for the appellant. Mr. A.K.Chopra, Sr. Advocate, with Mr. Rajnish Chauhan, Advocate, for respondent No.1. HEMANT GUPTA, J. (ORAL) The plaintiff is in second appeal aggrieved against the judgment and decree passed by the Courts below, whereby suit for specific performance of an agreement to sell dated 28.12.1993, was decreed for the recovery of amount of earnest money paid. Both the Courts have returned a concurrent finding of fact that both the parties were not ready and willing to perform their part of the contract in terms of agreement to sell dated 28.12.1993. Keeping in view the fact that the amount of Rs.1 lac was paid by the plaintiff to the defendants, decree for the aforesaid amount has been passed. I do not find any patent illegality or irregularity in the findings recorded by the Courts below, which are based upon appreciation of evidence. It could not be pointed that any evidence has been misread or not taken into consideration. Findings of fact recorded by the R.S.A.No.355 of 2008 2 Courts below cannot be permitted to be disputed by reappreciation of evidence in second appeal. Consequently, I do not find that any substantial question of law arises for consideration of this Court. Dismissed. 11.09.2009 (HEMANT GUPTA) Vimal JUDGE