1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO.684 OF 2009 Santaji Hanmantrao Ghorpade .. Applicant Versus Satyashodhak Sahakari Bank Limited Kolhapur .. Respondent Mr.Sameer Tambekar for applicant. CORAM : S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATE : 23rd March 2010. P.C.: 1] Heard learned Counsel for the applicant. His pursuasive ability apart, I do not find any reason to interfere with the order of the executing court holding that the application for execution of the subject award is maintainable. 2] The apprehension of the learned Counsel that the lower appellate court’s order modifying the award of the trial court will not be given effect to by the executing court is not well founded. If the decree of the trial court is modified by the higher court in appeal, then, needless to state 2 that executing court will enforce and execute the decree as modified and it would be open for the applicant to place before the executing court such materials so as to support his plea that the decree is modified in appeal and there is direction from the appellate court to the original disputant to make appropriate adjustments in the final amount. If such a request is made, the executing court will consider it and pass appropriate orders. 3] The second contention that the certificate which is to be issued in terms of section 98(a) of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act has not been issued, therefore the Executing Court was not justified in holding that the application for execution is maintainable. 4] Having perused the section 98(a) and the order of the executing court, to my mind, in the peculiar facts of this case when the applicant himself relies upon the award as modified by the lower appellate court, then, it is not open to him to raise such objection. At the most, non production of the certificate along with the application for execution may amount to irregularity but not vitiating the proceedings as a whole. Such a view taken in this case and in the backdrop of the peculiar facts is 3 iminently fair and does not require any interference either. 5] In the result, subject to the above clarification, revision application is dismissed. (S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J)