JUDGMENT

1. Revision Petitioner/accused feeling aggrieved by the judgment of First Appellate Court on the file of IV Additional District and Sessions Judge, D.K.Mangaluru, in Crl.A.No.270/2013, dtd. 24/3/2015, confirming the judgment of Trial Court on the file of JMFC-V Court, Mangaluru in C.C.No.1849/2010, dtd. 22/7/2013 preferred this Revision Petition.

2. Parties to the Revision Petition are referred with their ranks as assigned in the Trial Court for the sake of convenience.

3. Heard the arguments of both sides.

4. After hearing both the sides and on perusal of Trial Court Records with judgment of both the Courts below the following points arise for consideration: 1) Whether the impugned judgment under revision petition which confirmed the judgment of the Trial Court is perverse capricious and legally not sustainable and call for any interference by this Court?

5. On careful perusal of the oral and documentary evidence placed on record, it would go to show that complainant and accused are known to each other since several years. Accused demanded hand loan of Rs.2, 00, 000.00 from the complainant on 11/1/2010 with an assurance to repay the same within short span of time. Accused