1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR LPA NO. 350 OF 2009 IN W.P. NO. 1136 OF 2009 (Vidarbha Hindi Sahitya Sammelan vs. Rajendra Prasad Madhav Prasad Shukla) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI & F.M. REIS, JJ. OCTOBER 08, 2009. Heard Shri Dangre, Advocate for the appellant and Shri Ghare, Advocate for the respondent. We find that the appellant was party defendant in a suit filed under Section 6 of Specific Relief Act proceedings and description of suit property as given in plaint schedule has been accepted by that Court. The decree has been drawn accordingly and is being executed. The decree was not challenged further by present appellant and the objection to identity of property was raised for the first time in execution. The Court below, therefore, appointed Commissioner to find out said identity. The Commissioner has submitted his report and execution is to proceed further accordingly. The learned Single Judge has already dismissed the petition of the appellant. Shri Dangre, learned counsel for the appellant states that the appellant has decided to challenge the judgment and decree passed in Section 6 2 proceedings independently in revision. Hence, without prejudice to their rights in said matter, we find that insofar as present challenge is concerned, it is misconceived. Letters Patent Appeal is, therefore, dismissed. However, there shall be no order as to costs. JUDGE JUDGE *GS.