gst 1 cra446.10.sxw IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 446 OF 2010. Smt.Saku Chandar Rathod... .... ..... ..Applicant. V/s Prabhakar R. Mishra & Anr. ..... .... ..Respondents. Mr.M.P.Mishra i/by M/s.M.P.Mishra & Co., Adv. For the applicant. Mr.Pramod J. Pawar, Adv. For R.No.1. CORAM: B.R. GAVAI, J. 7th April, 2011 PC: By way of revision application the applicant challenges the order date 22.3.2010 vide which the application filed by the present applicant to stay the issuance of attachment warrant and if it is so issued for recalling the same came to be rejected. 2. A suit filed by respondent No.1 against respondent No.2 was decreed. Since respondent No.2 did not comply with the decree, execution proceedings came to be filed by respondent No.1. After the attachment of property belonging to respondent No.2 and after it was put on auction, an application came to be filed by the present applicant contending therein that he had purchased the suit property and as such filed an application as aforesaid. Same is rejected. 3. Learned executing court has found that the sale deed on which the applicant relies upon was not on proper stamp paper so also it was not registered. It was further found that in the municipal record name of the judgment-debtor was mentioned in respect of suit property. Apart from that it was further found that the present applicant had herself admitted in cross examination that she did not make inquiry whether suit property was belonging gst 2 cra446.10.sxw to the vendor and further that the vendor had not given her possession of the suit property. 4. In that view of the matter it cannot be said that jurisdiction exercised by the learned trial Court has been exercised with material irregularity to warrant interference in the revisional jurisdiction. Hence civil revision application stands rejected.