- (1.) The defendant is in second appeal aggrieved against the judgment and decree passed by the Courts below, whereby the suit for recovery of the sale consideration of agricultural produce sold by the plaintiff to the defendant, was decreed.
(2.) It is the case of the plaintiff that he had sold specified quantity of wheat on 24.4.1998, 29.4.1998 and 2.5.1998 but the defendant has not paid price thereof. The sale of wheat was sought to be proved from the entries in the record of the Market Committee. Both the Courts have recorded a concurrent finding of fact that the plaintiff has sold the agricultural produce to the defendant and the defendant has not paid for the same. Reliance is placed upon the entry of the register Exhibit PX and Exhibit PZ proved by PW2-Sham Sunder, an employee of the Market Committee in respect of the transactions effected between the plaintiff and the defendant. Thus, both the Courts granted the decree in favour of the plaintiff.
(3.) Learned counsel for the appellant has vehemently argued that the documents Exhibit PX and PZ are not signed either by the plaintiff or by the defendant and, therefore, cannot be taken into consideration.;