C. SURYANARAYAN Vs. RATANLAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE second appeal dated Dai 16, 1353 Fasli, November 21, 1943 was filed by the defendant against the concurrent decrees and judgments of the Courts below, whereby a suit to recover Rs. 4,373 -9 -3 from the appellant has been allowed.

(2.) THE plaintiffs, who are respondents before US, instituted the suit to recover the amount as the price of castor -seeds sold to the appellant between Amardad, 3, and Mehir 13, 1848 Fasli: June 9 and August 19,1S39. In his written statement the appellant admitting the purchases of the commodity set up payment of the full amount claimed producing seven receipts from June 7 to June 17, 1889 purporting to have been signed either by respondent I, or his agent and further alleged the remaining sum of Rs. 326 -3 -0 to have been paid on 10 -8 -1939 through one Mohd. Ibrahim, though no receipt for this amount had been given.

(3.) IN this second appeal, the main question is whether the prices of the oil seeds have been paid by the appellant. There is also a further legal point arising out of the extension of the Civil Procedure Code at the date of the hearing of this appeal to Part B States. Section 101 of the Code has been relied upon by the respondents in support of the arguments that second appeal can now be entertained only on question of law and inasmuch as the appellant seeks to vacate the findings of lower Court on facts, this second appeal on questions of fact can do longer be entertained.