:1: IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORDINARY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION CHAMBER CHAMBER CHAMBER SUMMONS NO. 851 OF 2007 SUMMONS NO. 851 OF 2007 SUMMONS NO. 851 OF 2007 IN IN IN EXECUTION EXECUTION EXECUTION APPLICATION NO. 124 OF 2006 APPLICATION NO. 124 OF 2006 APPLICATION NO. 124 OF 2006 IN IN IN HYDERABAD HYDERABAD HYDERABAD SUIT NO. 403 OF SUIT NO. 403 OF SUIT NO. 403 OF 1998 1998 1998 Hyderabad Industries Ltd. ... Applicants. (Orig.Plaintiffs/Judgment Creditors) V/s. M/s. Raj Roofings & Ors. ... Respondents (Orig.Defendants). None for the Applicant. Mr. Puthran for Respondent No.2. ..... CORAM CORAM CORAM : S.C. DHARMADHIKARI,J. : S.C. DHARMADHIKARI,J. : S.C. DHARMADHIKARI,J. 31ST 31ST 31ST MARCH 2009. MARCH 2009. MARCH 2009. P.C. P.C. P.C. : : : . Perused the Chamber Summons and the affidavit filed in reply. 2. This is a Chamber Summons by Respondent No.2 and it is directed against the Decree Holder/Judgment Creditors, Hyderabad Industries Ltd. Respondent No.2 is M/s. Canara Bank. The Chamber Summons is filed on the basis that the decree passed by the City Civil Court at Hyderabad is being executed against Respondent No.2. 3. However, the Judgment Creditors in their Affidavit in Reply have clarified that no Execution Proceedings are initiated against Canara Bank that is the statement made :2: in paragraphs 5 and 7 of the Affidavit filed on 23rd March 2009. 4. In the light of this affidavit, it is not necessary to pass any orders in the Chamber Summons. The Statement made on affidavit sufficiently protects Respondent No.2. There is no apprehension that the decree would be executed as against Canara Bank. Hence, the Chamber Summons is disposed off, in the light of the statement made in paragraphs 5 and 7 of the affidavit dated 23rd March 2009. (S.C. (S.C. (S.C. DHARMADHIKARI,J.) DHARMADHIKARI,J.) DHARMADHIKARI,J.)