- 1 - IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE WRIT PETITION NO.499 OF 2004 Mr.Uday Warunjikar for the Petitioner. Mr.A.P.Vanarse, AGP for Respondent No.1. Mr.H.C.Vakshe for Respondent No.2. ----------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court’s or Judge’s appearances, Court’s orders order or directions ----------------------------------------------------- ¦ ¦ ¦ CORAM: D.K.DESHMUKH, J. ¦ DATED: 20TH APRIL,2005 P.C.: The net result of the order which is impugned in the petition is that the revenue authorities have not entertained alleged compromise between the parties which results in modification of the decree passed by the civil court. In my opinion, the revenue authorities were justified in not taking entry in the revenue record pursuant to the alleged compromise, because unless and until - 2 - a decree passed by the civil court is modified by the civil court itself, the revenue authorities cannot take mutation entries which go contrary to the decree passed by the civil court though that compromise may be between the parties who are parties to the civil suit. The remedy of the party is to approach the civil court and seek modification in the decree. Petition has no substance. It is rejected. ...