1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION FERA APPEAL NO.38 OF 2008 Janak G. Turakhia. ...Appellant. vs. 1.Union of India & others. ...Respondents. --- Mr.Vikram Nankani i/b. M/s.Nankani & Associates, for Appellant. Mr.Y.R.Mishra with Mr.D.A.Dube, for Respondents. CORAM: D.K.DESHMUKH & J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ. DATED:26TH September,2008. P.C.:- 1. Heard the learned Counsel appearing for both the sides. The tribunal has recorded finding of fact that the appellant was not able to prove that money belongs to him. It was the case of the appellant that he had gone to Chennai with the money and had handed 2 over that money to his friend in Chennai. But neither the date on which the appellant visited Chennai anywhere disclosed nor any source from where he has withdrawn money has been disclosed. In our opinion, the finding of fact cannot be interfered with. Appeal cannot be entertained. Hence, it is rejected. (D.K.DESHMUKH, J.) (J.P.DEVADHAR, J.) 3 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO.1799 OF 2008 IN FERA APPEAL NO.38 OF 2008 Janak G. Turakhia. ...Appellant. vs. 1.Union of India & others. ...Respondents. --- Mr.Vikram Nankani i/b. M/s.Nankani & Associates, for Appellant. Mr.Y.R.Mishra with Mr.D.A.Dube, for Respondents. CORAM: D.K.DESHMUKH & J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ. DATED:26TH September,2008. P.C.:- In view of the order passed today i.e. 26.9.2008 in appeal no.38 of 2008, the present civil application does not survive for consideration, hence, disposed of. (D.K.DESHMUKH, J.) 4 (J.P.DEVADHAR, J.)