1 vks IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.1878 OF 2009 Dagadu Daulata Lakade (deceased) through Uttam Lakade & ors .. Petitioners -versus Jagannath Daulata Lakade & ors .. Respondents. Mr. Uday Warunjikar, for the petitioners. Mr. S.S. Shah, for respondent No.l CORAM: A.S. OKA, J. DATED:25 th September, 2009. P.C. 1. By order dated 2lst August, 2009, the partieswere put to notice that the petition will be heard finally. 2. The petitioners are the legal representatives of original defendant who is the judgment debtor in the execution application made by the first respondent decree holder. By the impugned order, the names of the petitioners are ordered to be brought on record of the execution proceedings. 3. The submission of learned counsel for the petitioners is that there is no affidavit in support of the 2 application filed by the first respondent. Moreover, there is no prayer for condonation of delay and for setting aside the abatement. He submitted that objections raised by the petitioners to the application made by the first respondent have not been considered and by a cryptic order, the application has been allowed. 4. I have considered the submissions. The application has been made in pending execution proceeding for executing the decree passed in favour of the first respondent. The provisions of Rules 3, 4 and 8 of Order XXII of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, are not applicable to the execution proceedings. The perusal of the reply filed by the petitioner shows that there is no dispute that the original judgment debtor has died on 13th September, 2004. The objection raised by the petitioner is only a technical objection that there is no prayer for setting aside the abatement. The effect of the impugned order is that the petitioners who are admittedly the legal representatives of the original judgment debtor have been brought on record of the execution application. Therefore, no fault can be found with the impugned order. However, the executing court will have to follow the procedure prescribed by Rule 22 of the Order XXI of the Code of Civil 3 Procedure, 1908. Subject to what is observed above, the petition is rejected. All the contentions raised in the execution proceeding are kept open. (A.S. OKA, J)