(-1-) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 6946 OF 2004 WRIT PETITION NO. 6946 OF 2004 WRIT PETITION NO. 6946 OF 2004 Prakash Anantrao Gulekar ...Petitioner Versus Pramila Pandurang Gulekar & Ors. ...Respondents ..... Ms. Gauri Godse, counsel for Petitioner Mr. P.S. Dani, counsel for Respondents 2 to 6. ..... CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: B. H. MARLAPALLE, J. B. H. MARLAPALLE, J. B. H. MARLAPALLE, J. DATED: 30TH MARCH, 2005 DATED: 30TH MARCH, 2005 DATED: 30TH MARCH, 2005 P. C.:- P. C.:- P. C.:- 1. Heard Ms. Godse, the learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. In Regular Darkhast No. 8 of 1994 two applications at Exh. 32 and 33 came to be filed. The application at Exh.32 was for declaration that the Regular Darkhast proceeding stood abated and the second application at Exh.33 was for staying the execution proceedings or staying the possession of the partition portions to be handed over to the decree holders. Both these applications came to be rejected by the impugned order on 27.4.2004. 3. For the reasons stated in the order passed in (-2-) Writ Petition No. 333 of 2004 and in writ petition No. 6889 of 2004, today, the challenge to the impugned order also fails in this petition and hence, the petition is rejected summarily.