1 WP 5093/10 abs FARAD CONTINUATION IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 5093 OF 2010 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Court's or Judge's Orders Coram, appearances, Court's Orders or directions and Registrar's Orders Mr. Amit B. Borkar for the petitioner. CORAM : D.G. KARNIK, J. DATE : 9TH AUGUST 2010 P.C. : 1. Heard. 2. The writ petition is directed against an order dated 30 January 2010 passed by the Joint Civil Judge, Junior Division, Kolhapur rejecting the application filed by the petitioner objecting to the execution of a decree. 3. A decree for possession of the suit property was passed against the petitioner. In the execution application, the petitioner 2 WP 5093/10 appeared and made an application objecting to the execution of the decree. Copy of the application for objection is not filed on the record of the writ petition. Hence, on 12 July 2010 while orally directing the petitioner to file a copy of the objection application, I granted leave to amend the writ petition so as to annexe the copy. Thereafter the time for carrying out the amendment was extended by an order dated 26 July 2010. Till today, the copy has not been filed and the amendment has not been carried out. As such, it is not possible to know what was the exact objection raised by the petitioner to execution of the decree. Learned counsel for the petitioner, however, submitted that the objection was that in the second appeal, the High Court had not properly considered the statutes applicable in the erstwhile State of Kolhapur and, therefore, the decree was not valid. It is settled principle of law that the executing court cannot go behind the decree and except on the ground of lack of 3 WP 5093/10 jurisdiction, the validity of a decree cannot be challenged before the executing court. No contention is raised about the lack of jurisdiction to pass the decree. 4. In the circumstances, there is no merit in the writ petition, which is hereby rejected summarily. (D.G. KARNIK, J.)