1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 2881 OF 2010 (Atul Pradeep Waghade vs. Gajanan Vitthalrao Bamankar & Ors.) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J. JUNE 25, 2010. Shri Chandurkar, learned counsel for the petitioner contends that as only 25% of the bid amount has been deposited and balance 75% is still with the auction purchaser, sale is not complete and hence objection under Order 21, Rule 58 of Civil Procedure Code ought to have been enquired into. He further contends that the petitioner is only about 20 years and got knowledge that his father stood as surety for the judgment debtor from his mother and on valid grounds assailed attachment of property with his father. According to him, fact that 6 H. of land is still in balance with family, cannot be the reason to reject the objection raised by the petitioner. Though I find that objection under Order 21, Rule 58 of CPC could have been enquired into on merits by Executing Court, still the other reason given by that Court that it has attached only 88 R. of property and balance 6 H. is not attached and the right of Objector, if any, can be taken care of from that balance portion, is 2 neither erroneous nor perverse. There is no jurisdictional error. Writ Petition is, therefore, rejected. However, there shall be no order as to costs. JUDGE *GS.