CW 10322/08 //1// In the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan Jaipur Bench ** Civil Writ Petition No.10322/2008 Jagdish Prasad Versus Gokul Chand & Others. Date of Order ::: 29/06/09 Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Rastogi Mr. Pankaj Gupta, for petitioner Instant petition has been filed assailing order dt.24/07/03 (Ann.1) whereby Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.) Dausa dismissed application (DRA-4/2000) filed by petitioner (Jagdish Prasad) U/s 6 of Rajasthan Debt Relief Act, 1957 (“the Act”); and revision petition (CRP-2/2004) preferred by petitioner against order (Ann.1) has also been dismissed by District Judge, Dausa vide order dt.29/01/2005 (Ann.2). Petitioner filed application U/s 6 of the Act, 1957 seeking determination of loan against respondent No.1, in which it has been inter-alia averred that he advanced a loan of Rs.85,000/- to respondent No.1 on the agreed interest on 08/02/99, for which promissory note alongwith receipt of loan amount was executed by respondent No.1, who failed to repay the loan amount; as such petitioner served legal notice on 21/09/99 and since outstanding loan amount was not repaid by respondent NO.1, application was filed before Civil Judge cum Debt Relief Authority for payment CW 10322/08 //2// of loan amount in reference to his promissory note. In reply to the application U/s 6 of the Act, very promissory note alleged to have been executed and so also of taking loan were seriously disputed by respondent No.1; and the petitioner failed to produce prima facie material on record, by which it could be established that promissory note produced alongwith application was ever accepted by respondent No.1 for advancing loan amount in question. Taking note of material on record, the authority finally rejected application U/s 6 of the Act vide order dt.24/07/03 (Ann.1) and the revisional authority also examined submissions made by petitioner in details and affirmed the finding recorded by the authority. This Court has gone through orders impugned and material on record; and finds no manifest error apparent on the face of record in the finding recorded by courts below which may call for interference. Consequently, writ petition fails and is hereby dismissed. (Ajay Rastogi), J. K.Khatri/p.2/10322CW08Jun29Ds.doc