1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD. WRIT PETITION NO.4518 OF 2009 ... Mrs. Tulsabai Vijaysing Pardeshi ...PETITIONER V E R S U S Julal Popat Patil and ors. ..RESPONDENTS. Shri. S.H.Tripathi, Advocate for the petitioner. CORAM : B.R. GAVAI, J : DATE : 15th JULY, 2009 PER COURT :- 1. By way of present petition, the petitioner challenges the order below Exh.42 dated 18.06.2009 passed by the learned Jt. Civil Judge (S.D.) Jalgaon in Special Darkhast case No.101/2006. 2. The suit filed by the respondent No.1 has been decreed by the Appellate Court on 10.08.2006. Second appeal preferred against it was dismissed on 07.03.2007. The S.L.P was dismissed by Apex Court on 27th of April, 2007. It is thus clear that the decree passed by the Appellate has been confirmed up to the Apex Court. 3- The respondent No.1 had filed proceedings for execution of the said decree i.e Special Darkhast No. 101 of 2006. In the said proceedings an application came to be filed on 10.06.2009 praying for issuance of possession warrant of the suit property alongwith the standing crops. Said application is 2 allowed on 18.06.2009. Hence present writ petition. 4- Shri S.H.Tripathi, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that if the petitioner is granted time till the end of December, he is willing to handover the possession. He submits that the petitioner has invested substantial amount in the field and as such his possession be protected at least till the end of December,2009. 5- When a decree is passed by the competent Court and affirmed up to the Apex Court, the execution of such a decree needs to see lia of someday. A decree cannot be permitted to be only a paper decree. Decree passed by the competent court has to be given is logical effect. After dismissal of S.L.P the applicant had no right in the property. There was no necessity for the petitioner to have invested the amount in the said land. 6- In this view of the matter, I am not inclined to interfere in the present petition in exercise of extra ordinary jurisdiction under Article 227 of Constitution of India. Same is therefore dismissed. ( B. R. GAVAI ) JUDGE ..... aaa/wp4518.09