1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO.272 OF 2011 Chagan Sambhu Patel [deceased] by his L.Rs. Sunil Chhagan Patel ..Appellant Versus Balkrishna Somnath Lahoti ..Respondent ... Mr V.T.Choudhari, Advocate for appellant .... CORAM : NARESH H. PATIL AND T.V.NALAWADE, JJ. DATE : 7th OCTOBER 2011 PER COURT The appellant challenged the order passed by Civil Judge, Senior Division, Nandurbar in Miscellaneous Application No.24/2002, wherein the trial Court had issued possession warrant under order 21 Rule 95 of C.P.C. By order dated 5/9/2011, the learned Single Judge dismissed the Writ Petition observing that as far as the objection of stamp duty is concerned, the same would be for Government. If the Court comes to the conclusion that the stamp duty is not proper, the Court can impound the said certificate. It was also observed that the said objection in respect of insufficiency of stamp duty was not raised by the appellant before the executing Court. The learned 2 counsel submits that there is standing crop in the subject field and the handing over of possession under the orders of possession warrant would create fragmentation which is against the provisions of Bombay Prevention of Fragmentation and Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1947. In the light of the order passed under Order 21 Rule 95 of C.P.C., and the view adopted by the Single Judge, we are not inclined to entertain this Appeal. Appeal is dismissed. 2] In view of dismissal of Appeal, Civil Application No.11667/2011 does not survive and the same is disposed of. (T.V.NALAWADE,J. ) (NARESH H. PATIL,J. ) umg/lpa272-11