1 AO NOS. 52/2005 & 88 OF 2004 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 52 OF 2005 ,With CA/7513/2005 ,In AO/52/2005 AKILBANOO SAYYAD AKBAR VERSUS SHAIKH NASIR CHANNUBHAI SHAIKH & ORS ... Mrs. C.S.Deshmukh, Adv., for appellant. Mr.R.L.Kute, Adv., h/f Mr.R.N.Dhorde, Adv., for repsondent no.1. With APPEAL FROM ORDER NO.88/2004 Akilabano Sayyad Akbar vs. Jamshid Shaikh Shabbir & another ... Advocate for Petitioners : Mrs.C S Deshmukh Mrs. A.N.Ansari, Adv., for respondent no.1. Respondent nos. 1 and 2 served. ... CORAM : K.U. CHANDIWAL, J. Dated: December 22, 2011 ... PER COURT :- 1. Heard learned Counsel for the appellant extensively. 2. In execution proceedings being R.D.No. 113/2004, an application was moved by the appellant to implead her as third party under Order XXI Rule 97 of Code of Civil Procedure. Learned Judge has rejected the same. 2 AO NOS. 52/2005 & 88 OF 2004 3. The applicant has in-built remedies under Order XXI of Code of Civil Procedure to exhaust as it provides ring-fence. The applicant may agitate her cause by invoking Section 47 of Code of Civil Procedure. Pendency of her partition suit RCS No.379/1995 or decree therein will not be an impediment in proceeding with the execution unless there is specific inhibition in those proceedings to the executing court. Consequently, the order under challenge, rejecting impleading the applicant/appellant as third party does not call for interference. Appeals From Order (No.52/2005 and 88/2004), along with the civil application/s, disposed of. ( K.U. CHANDIWAL, J. ) ... agp/52-05ao