1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR Second Appeal No. 183/2010 (Vilas Keshavrao Jumade VERSUS State of Mah.) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Shri V.M. Deshpande, counsel for the appellant. CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK, J. DATE : MAY 4, 2010 . Heard. The appellant is the original plaintiff. A suit was filed by the plaintiff for recovery of Rs.1,51,000/-. It was the case of the plaintiff that he had entered into an agreement with respondent for excavation of sand. The plaintiff had paid the earnest amount of Rs.75,000/-. Later on, the plaintiff realized that there was a Gram Panchayat Resolution, which stated that it was necessary to pay a cess of Rs.10/- per trip on the transportation of the sand. On getting the knowledge about the resolution, the plaintiff realized that the contract was not profitable. It was the case of the plaintiff that the defendant ought to have informed the plaintiff about the resolution of the Gram Panchayat before entering into the contract with the plaintiff. The plaintiff, therefore, sought an amount of Rs.1,51,000/- which included the pre-litigation interest. 2 Both, the trial as well as the appellate Court, on appreciation of the evidence on record, held that the plaintiff was not entitled to the amount of Rs.1,51,000/- as claimed by the plaintiff and the suit of the plaintiff was liable to be dismissed. The Courts held that the plaintiff did not succeed in proving that the plaintiff was unable to lift the sand from the Ghat due to the inaction on the part of the respondent to inform about the government resolution. The findings recorded by both the Courts are based on a proper appreciation of the material evidence on record. They do not give rise to any substantial question of law. The second appeal is dismissed with no order as to costs. JUDGE APTE