1A0-1049-08 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPEAL FROM ORDER No.1049/2008 Mr Rohidas Pandurang Nimbalkar and another. .. Appellants. vs. Mr Vishal Dnyaneshwar Nimbalkar and others ....Respondents. Mr Satyajeet Mirajkar, Advocate for the Appellants. None for the Respondents. CORAM: A.R.JOSHI,J DATED: 12th MARCH,2010 P.C.:- 1. Heard the learned Advocate, Mr Satyajeet Mirajkar, for the appellants-original plaintiff Nos. 2 and 3 in whose favour R.C.S. No. 1850/1974 was decreed. On decree of said suit, the present appellants - original plaintiffs preferred execution proceedings bearing Regular 2A0-1049-08 Darkhast No.57/2002. Said Execution was obstructed by third party who are respondents herein. By order below Exh.64 filed in the R.D.No. 57/2002, the application of the Obstructionist, present respondents was rejected. The said order was passed by 8 th Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Pune on 28.6.2007. The said order was challenged by the Obstructionist in Appeal No.507/2007 before the District Judge -4, Pune. The said appeal was allowed on 9 th May, 2008 and the matter was remanded back to the Trial Court for re- appreciation and passing the order afresh on Exh.64 filed in Regular Darkhast No.57/2002. The said order of District Judge, Pune dated 9.5.2008 is challenged by the present appellants-plaintiffs in this Appeal. 2. Today, during the arguments, the learned Advocate appearing for the appellants made a statement that though the Appeal No.507/2007 was preferred before the District Judge 4,Pune, there was no stay to the proceedings before the executing Court. Consequently, further steps were taken by the Trial Court in pursuance of the order dated 9.5.2008 passed in Civil Appeal No.507/2007 and application of the Obstructionist i.e. Exhibit-64, preferred in Regular Darkhast no.57/2002, came to be heard afresh and by order dated 23.2.2010, 3 rd Joint Civil Judge, S.D.,Pune again dismissed the said obstruction. Said statement made on 3A0-1049-08 behalf of the present appellants is recorded and in view of this nothing survives in the present A.O. as in the present A.O., exception was taken to the order of remand passed by the District Judge, 4 th Pune. Consequently, present A.O., is disposed of as became infructuous. Directions are given to the Trial Court, Pune which is seized of R.D. No.57/2002 to dispose of the same, as expeditiously as possible, according to law. No order as to costs. (JUSTICE A.R.JOSHI)