(1) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH, AT AURANGABAD. WRIT PETITION NO. 497 OF 2011 Sau. Limbabai w/o. Rambhau Nagargoje, died per L.Rs. : 1. Vithal s/o. Rambhau Nagargoje, Age : 45 years, Occupation : Agriculture. 2. Pandurang s/o. Rambhau Nagargoje, Age : 43 years, Occupation : Agriculture. Both R/o. Sangam, .. Petitioners Taluka : Parli Vaijinath, (Original District : Beed. decree holders) versus Vaijinath s/o. Bhimrao Munde, Age : 60 years, Occupation : Agriculture, .. Respondents R/o. Tokwadi, (Nos.1 to 7 - Taluka : Parli Vaijinath, Original District : Beed, judgment debtors) and 8 others. ....................... Mr. K.F. Shingare, Advocate, for the petitioners. ........................ (2) CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATE : 24TH JANUARY 2011 COURT'S ORDER : 1. The contention of the petitioners / decree holders is, after process was issued under Section 54 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, revenue authorities have already worked out partition and possession is also delivered accordingly. The working and de-limitation of share has already attained finality way back in the year 2000 and hence execution proceedings needed to be closed. It is contended that the revenue authority has already completed consolidation proceedings and the Civil Court cannot reopen the same. 2. The objection raised before the executing court is the same challenge as raised before the revenue authority and revenue authority is looking into the said challenge. The executing court has, therefore, refused to close the proceedings. Hence, at this stage, I am not inclined to interfere in the matter. If the petitioners find that the Civil Court is trying to go back behind the decree or, in any way, acting contrary to the orders passed by the revenue authorities, they are at liberty to approach this Court again. (3) 3. With these observations, the petition is disposed of. No costs. ( B.P. DHARMADHIKARI ) JUDGE ......................... bgp/497wp