1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. SECOND APPEAL NO. 621 OF 2005 (Ramrao Laxman Kasture .v. Shamrao Ganpatrao Akkalwar) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram appearances, Court's orders or directions Court's or Judge's Orders and Registrar's orders. Shri A.S. Deshpande, Advocate for the appellant. Shri S.C. Bhalerao, Advocate for the respondent. CORAM : C.L. PANGARKAR, J. 15TH JANUARY, 2008. Heard the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the respective parties. The plaintiff had instituted a suit for specific performance of the contract. The learned Judge of the trial Court had dismissed the suit. Neither he granted decree for specific performance of contract nor he ordered a refund of earnest money. The appellate Court found that the plaintiff was entitled for a decree of refund and was not entitled to decree for specific performance of the contract. This decree of the refund is being challenged by the defendant. It was contended on behalf of the appellant that the appellant/defendant has refunded the entire amount and, therefore, even a decree of refund could 2 not have been passed. After having gone through the judgment of the learned Judge of the first appellate court, it is found that he has observed that the defendant does not give the details as to on which date what amount was refunded and there is no receipt of repayment of the amount. The amount involved is Rs.75,000/-. The learned Judge of the first appellate court has rightly found that no person would refund so much amount without obtaining any kind of receipt and since the witnesses are unable to give the time and date of the refund of amount, their testimony cannot be believed. I do not find that the findings recorded by the learned first appellate Court call for any interference from this Court. There is no substantial question of law raised in the appeal. The appeal is dismissed in limine. JUDGE *rrg.