IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION SECOND APPEAL SECOND APPEAL SECOND APPEAL NO.756 OF 2005 NO.756 OF 2005 NO.756 OF 2005 Nakushibai C. Bhosale ..Appellant versus Ramchandra S. Chougule ..Respondent. Mr.K.B.Sonwalkar for the Appellant Coram : S.R.Sathe, J. Coram : S.R.Sathe, J. Coram : S.R.Sathe, J. Dated : 9th March, 2006 Dated : 9th March, 2006 Dated : 9th March, 2006 P.C. 1. Heard the learned Advocate for the Appellant. It is a simple suit for recovery of the amount. From the perusal of the order passed by the Appellate Court it is very clear that he has correctly appreciated the evidence and passed the order. . There is no substantial question of law involved in the matter. Objection of the learned Advocate for appellant is for incorrect appreciation of evidence. However, appreciation is correct. So there is no scope under Sectio 108 of CPC. Hence appeal is dismissed in limine. (S.R.Sathe, J.)