1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.1676 OF 2007 Devdas Balkrishna Dhopate .. Petitioner. Vs. 1. Suresh Vasant Velhal & ors .. Respondents. Mr. Shriniwas S Patwardhan, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Amit Borkar, Advocate for respondent no.1. CORAM : D.B.BHOSALE, J. DATED : 15/10/2010. PC: 1. This writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India is directed against the order dated 6.1.2007 passed by the IInd Joint Civil Judge, Jr Dn., Karad, allowing the application filed by the respondent-judgment debtor, being Exhibit-25 in Regular Darkhast No.152 of 2006. By this application, the respondents sought appointment of Court Commissioner seeking measurement of the suit property through T.I.LR. 2. I have heard learned counsel for the parties for some time and they have fairly stated that I need not record reasons for disposing of this writ petition and they have agreed for disposal of the writ petition in terms of this order. The learned counsel for the petitioner-decree holder submits that the petitioner shall not take anything more than the suit property, as described in T 2 paragraph 1(A) and 1(B) of the plaint and which is the subject matter of the suit. There is no dispute regarding identity of the suit property. Mr Borkar, learned counsel for the respondent- Judgment debtor also submits that the judgment debtor has no objection for the decree holder taking possession of the suit property as described in the plaint in the execution proceedings. In view of the statements made by the learned counsel for the parties, I dispose of this writ petition by the following order: The executing court shall proceed to execute the decree and hand over possession of the suit property, as described in the plaint and which is the subject matter of the suit, to the plaintiff-decree holder. While doing so, the executing court shall not hand over possession of any more area than what is described in the plaint. At the time of handing over the possession, the executing court, if finds it necessary, may appoint some competent person to see that the suit property only shall be handed over to the plaintiff-decree holder and/or there shall be no excess execution of the decree. With these observations, the rule is disposed of and as a consequence thereof the order, impugned in the present writ petition, renders ineffective. No costs. (D.B.Bhosale, J.) 3