Sukhdev Singh vs Gurmail Singh
2024 Latest Caselaw 16208 P&H

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Sukhdev Singh vs Gurmail Singh on 4 September, 2024

Author: Rajbir Sehrawat

Bench: Rajbir Sehrawat

RSA No.1862 of 2019

-/-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
110
RSA No.1862 of 2019
DATE OF DECISION : 4" SEPTEMBER, 2024
Sukhdev Singh
.... Appellant
Versus
Gurmail Singh
.... Respondent
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJBIR SEHRAWAT
3K OK OK
Present: | Mr. C. M. Munjal, Advocate for the appellant.
OK Ok 3K
RAJBIR SEHRAWAT, J. (Oral)

1. This is the second appeal filed by the unsuccessful plaintiff,

challenging the concurrent judgment and findings recorded by the court below in a suit for recovery.

2. Stated in extremely brief, the facts of the case are that the plaintiff filed a suit asserting therein that he is non-resident Indian and is residing in Canada. He had come for some time to visit India. At that time the respondent, who is directly related to the appellant, expressed that he was in need of some money. Accordingly. The appellant had paid an amount of €18,50,000/- to him. In lieu thereof, to ensure return of the same, the respondent had issued two cheques in favour of the appellant. However, when the respondent refused to return the aforesaid amount on the agreed date, the appellant had to file the suit in question.

3. Having considered the material on record, the court of

Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division) Zira has dismissed the suit filed

2024.09.06 11:29

RSA No.1862 of 2019 #024-PHHO 114008 §

by the appellant vide order dated 15.02.2018. Aggrieved against the same the appellant had filed an appeal before the Additional District Judge, Ferozepur. However the said appeal has also been dismissed vide judgment and decree dated 30.11.2018. It is challenging the said judgment and decree that the present appeal has been filed by the appellant.

4. Having heard the counsel for the appellant this court does not find anything wrong or perverse in the findings recorded by the courts below. Otherwise also, since both the courts below have appreciated the evidence on record and have recorded the concurrent findings, therefore, the concurrent findings recorded by the courts below are not to be disturbed only because a different opinion can be formed on the basis of re-appreciation of the evidence. The appellant has failed to point out any sever perversity in appreciation of evidence or substantial question of law as involved in the matter.

5. In view of the above, this court does not find any ground to interfere in the matter. There is no merit in the appeal. Accordingly the

present regular second appeal is dismissed.

6. In view of the above, the present appeal is dismissed in default.

4" September, 2024. (RAJBIR SEHRAWAT)

Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes No