Judgment K.C. Sharma, J.-This civil first appeal under Section 96 CPC arises out of the Judgment and decree dated 212.1983 passed by the learned Additional District Judge No. 1 Jaipur City, Jaipur, thereby decreeing the suit of the plaintiff for recovery of Rs. 39,252.89. 2. The plaintiff filed a suit under Order 7 Rule 1 CPC for recovery of a sum of Rs. 91,463/-with the averments that the plaintiff , a registered partnership firm carried out certain construction works of rock-filtoe chain No. 50-60 or main earthen dam, in terms of contract having been entered into between the parties. Having completed construction work, the plaintiff submitted final bill for payment. The defendant did not make payment for some of the works completed by the plaintiff and also wrongly made deductions a detailed out in Sub-paras (1 to 8) of Para 4 of the suit. 3. The defendant contested the suit by filing written statement and denied the claims made by the plaintiff . The trial Court, on the basis of pleadings of the parties framed issues and at the conclusion of trial decreed the suit of the plaintiff for Rs. 39252.87 in respect of Claims No. 3, 5, 6 and 7 only. 4. The grievance of the defendant appellant is confined only to the extent that trial Court has committed serious error in decreeing the plaintiff’s suit in respect of Claim No. 5 for Rs. 20,311/-. 5. Learned Deputy Government Advocate has strenuously contended that stones measuring 8343.83 cubic meters belonging to the defendant was lying at the site and therefore, the defendant has rightly deducted a sum of Rs. 20,311/-as costs of stones measuring 1473.83 cubic meters. 6. I have considered the above argument. The plaintiff has claimed that the stones measuring 1473.80 cubic meters belonged to him and the stones measuring 6870 cubic meters belonged to the defendant, whereas the defendant has claimed that 8343.83 cubic meters stones belonged to the department. On perusal of pleadings of the parties and on going through the evidence it appears that stones measuring 6870 cubic meters only belonged to the department. The letter dated 12.04.1973 (Exh. 8) of the Assistant Engineer addressed to the plaintiff makes it clear that only 6870 cubic stones belong to the department was lying at the site. A glance at Exh. The letter dated 12.04.1973 (Exh. 8) of the Assistant Engineer addressed to the plaintiff makes it clear that only 6870 cubic stones belong to the department was lying at the site. A glance at Exh. 8 shows that in reference to the application of the plaintiff , the Assistant Engineer of the Department has informed the plaintiff that out of 5000 cubic stones to be used, he has to use 6870 cubic stones of the department. The letter Exh. 8 is an admitted document of the defendant, for which there is no evidence to show that the measurement stated therein was wrong. That apart, it may also be noticed that in Para 4(5) of the written statement, the defendant has specifically averred that the defendant never claimed the stone measuring 1473.83 cubic meters to be belonging to the department, meaning thereby, according to the defendant itself the 1473.83 cubic meters stone belonged to the plaintiff . In this view of the matter it must be concluded that the stone which belonged to the defendant and was lying at the site was only 6870 cubic meters and not 8343.83 as claimed by the defendant and as such the stones measuring 1473.83 belonged to the plaintiff and the defendant has wrongly deducted the amount of Rs. 20311.00. 7. In view of above, learned Counsel appearing for the plaintiff respondent has stated that he does not want to press the cross objections and prays that cross objections filed on behalf of plaintiff respondent may be dismissed as not pressed. 8. Resultantly, this appeal being devoid of merit has no force and is hereby dismissed. The cross objections are also dismissed as having not pressed. The parties are left to bear their own costs.