1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR Writ Petition No.4560 of 2009 (Taheruddin s/o Sujauddin Khatib v. Wajirkha s/o Gauskha Pathan, through LRs. Likhatbi Wajirkha Pathan and others) Office Notes, Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions Court's or Judge's orders and Registrar's order Shri C.S. Kaptan, Advocate for Petitioner. Shri Z.A. Haq, Advocate for Respondent Nos.1 to 8. Coram : R.K. Deshpande, J. Dated : 30 th August, 2010 This petition is preferred by the judgment-debtor in a compromise decree dated 28-4-1975, which has been confirmed by this Court in Second Appeals Nos.357 and 367 of 2001 decided on 21-4-2007, and which relates to the execution of 3 gunthas of land. The question involved is whether the petitioner is entitled to the area of 66/59 ft., i.e. 3.5 gunthas of land, in terms of the compromise decree dated 28-4-1975. By the impugned order dated 4-8-2009 passed in Darkhast No.16 of 2007 filed by the original respondent, it has been ordered that the warrant of possession be issued against the judgment-debtor to the extent of possession of 3 gunthas of land, as described in the compromise decree dated 28-4-1975. The Executing Court has, after taking into consideration the compromise decree, observed that there 2 was no dispute that the total land was 11 gunthas and in terms of the compromise decree dated 28-4-1975, the respondent was entitled to 8 gunthas of land. The decree has been executed in Regular Darkhast No.12 of 2001 filed by the respondent and the said decree was executed in respect of 8 gunthas of land. The said Regular Darkhast was disposed of on 3-3-2010, as the decree was satisfied. The said order has not been challenged by any of the parties. In view of this, no fault can be found with the order passed by the Executing Court. Thus, there is no substance in the petition and the same is, therefore, dismissed. Judge pdl