- 1 - 7202 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 7202 OF 2010 Mr.Shankarlal Purohit & ors .. Petitioners vs Mr.Shrigopal Fatehchand Ruia & ors ..Respondents Mr.K.H.Holambe Patil for Petitioners Ms.Anjali Chandurkar i.b. Mulla & Mulla Craigie Blunt & Caroe for Respondent no. 2 CORAM: A.S.Oka, J DATE: 8th October, 2010 P.C. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners. The petitioners are defendants/judgment debtors against whom a decree for possession has been passed. The 1st and 2nd respondents filed an application for execution of the said decree. An objection was raised by the petitioners that the person who has applied for execution of the decree is a person other than the plaintiff and therefore, the application made by the 1st and 2nd respondents in execution was not maintainable. - 2 - 7202 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners pointed out that the name of the 1st plaintiff is Shri Shrigopal Fatehchand Ruia and on the top of the application under Rule 2 of Order 21 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, the name of the 1st plaintiff appears as Shri.Gopal Fatechand Ruia. His submission is that the said Shri.Shrigopal Fatechand Ruia is not the 1st plaintiff (1st respondent herein) and hence the application is not competent. 3. I have considered the submissions made. In paragraph 9 of the order passed by the trial court, it is recorded that though the first line of the application shows the name of the 1st plaintiff as Shri Gopal Fatehchand Ruia, the said application has been verified by Shri Shrigopal Fatehchand Ruia. In view of this finding, no fault can be found in the impugned order of the trial Court by which objection raised by the petitioner was overruled. No case is made out for interference under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. Petition is rejected. A.S.Oka, - 3 - 7202 - 4 - 7202