GURDEEP SINGH Vs. NEW THIND TRADING COMPANY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) C.M.No.2558-C of 2010 Allowed as prayed for.C.M.No.2559-C of 2010 C.M. is allowed. The appellant is permitted to make good the deficiency in the court fee. C.M.No.2561-C of 2010 Having regard to the contents of the application, the same is allowed and delay of 187 days in filing the appeal is condoned. C.M.No.2560-C of 2006 in/and R.S.A.No.902 of 2010.

(2.) The suit for recovery filed by the respondent was initially dismissed by the learned trial court but in appeal the findings were reversed.

(3.) Learned counsel for the appellant states that the findings recorded by the first Appellate Court are incorrect, erroneous and liable to be set aside. He states that the Bahi entries have been produced which are admissible in evidence but the fact remains that the respondent failed to establish his case that it was a loan transaction of Rs.60,000/- which amount was taken by the appellant. He contends that it is the admitted case between the parties that the appellant used to sell his crop with the respondent but the respondent has not been able to establish whether this amount was on account of selling of crop or was a loan.