1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 623 OF 2009 IN LETTERS PATENT APPEAL (STAMP) NO. 10104 OF 2009 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 1564 OF 2007 (DECIDED) (Rambhau Lakshmanrao Wankhede and others .v. Vallabh Dongardas Shikchi) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram appearances, Court's orders or directions Court's or Judge's Orders and Registrar's orders. Shri P.S. Patil, Advocate for the applicants. CORAM : A.H. JOSHI AND PRASANNA B. VARALE, JJ. 15TH FEBRUARY, 2010. 1. This Court has called upon the appellants to advance submission on merits of appeal. This was considered necessary in order to avoid vexing of the respondent, if this Court finds that the appeal itself has no merit. 2. Perused the order of learned Single Judge and heard the learned Advocate for the appellants. 3. It is seen that in denial to the compromise decree recorded way back prior to 29 years, the appellants are claiming that they were never served with the summons and are claiming to be in possession on the ground that they still continue to be in possession. 4. Learned Single Judge has referred to the rival contentions and relied upon the observations relating to the record found in the judgments of the Courts below. The contentions of the present appellants/writ petitioners were untenable in the background that the record was showing that the summonses in the suit were served and they had appeared and filed the consent terms. Learned Single Judge also found that no document was brought on record by the present appellants to show their possession. 5. In this background, it is seen that the fact finding endorsed by the learned Single Judge is not liable to be interfered in the Letters 2 Patent Appeal. 6. Appeal has no merit and is dismissed. JUDGE JUDGE *rrg.