1 06-sa 183.2022.odt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR SECOND APPEAL NO. 183 OF 2022 ( ANIKET CONSTRUCTION THR. ITS PROP. SHRI AMIT BUDHRAJA, NAGPUR VS AMAR TIMBER MART (S.S.I. UNIT) AND PROP. CONCERN THR. PROP. SHRI AMRUTLAL JETHABHAI PATEL ) Office Notes, Office Memorandum of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or the directions, Court's or Judge's order and Registrar's orders. Mr. R.I.Thanvi, Advocate for appellant. Mr.Aniket Sawal, Advocate h/f Mr. H.R.Gadhia, Advocate for respondent. CORAM : ROHIT W. JOSHI, J. DATED : MARCH 18, 2026 1) A suit for recovery of an amount on account of sale of wood came to be decreed against the present appellant. Appeal preferred by the appellant was also dismissed by the learned first appellate Court. 2) The appellant/defendant did not conduct cross- examination of the plaintiff and his witness during the course of trial of the civil suit and also did not enter the witness box. It is not in dispute that the parties had business association for quite some time. 3) It is contended by the learned counsel for the appellant that the last payment made by the defendant to the plaintiff is on 29/04/2010. The seven bills with respect to which suit for recovery is filed are for the period from 08/07/2010 to 30/11/2010. In order to prove the claim the plaintiff has examined himself and another witness who is his nephew. The plaintiff has filed and duly proved invoices and delivery challans. The veracity of said documents was not questioned by cross- KOLHE 2026:BHC-NAG:4553 2 06-sa 183.2022.odt examining the plaintiff and his witness. The defendant has also not entered the witness box and thus has avoided cross- examination for which adverse inference needs to be drawn against him. No substantial question of law arises for consideration in the present appeal. Second Appeal is therefore, dismissed with no order as to costs. ( ROHIT W. JOSHI, J. ) KOLHE