1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVILAPPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.8446 OF 2006 Ramjan Shaba Patel & Anr. .. Petitioners Versus Smt.Shahajadi Dilawar Naikwade & Ors. .. Respondents Mr.M.R.Suryavanshi for petitioners Mr.Manoj Patil i/b. A.B.Vagyani for respondent Nos.2, 3 & 6 CORAM : S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATE : 12th June 2009. P.C.: 1] By this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, petitioners who are judgement debtors Nos. 3 and 7 challenge the order dated 18th October 2006 below Exh.82 in Regular Darkhast No.60 of 2001. 2] After this matter was argued for some time and attention of Mr.Suryavanshi was invited to the fact that final decree in the subject suit was not challenged by the petitioners – judgement debtors, he fairly states that the petitioners would adopt appropriate proceedings and apply for such reliefs therein as are permissible in law. However, while maintaining the impugned order, this Court should continue the ad-interim order so as to enable the petitioners to institute appropriate proceedings and apply for such reliefs therein as are permissible in law. 3] Having heard the parties, I see no reason to interfere with the order under challenge. More so, when Mr.Suryavanshi has stated that the petitioners would adopt appropriate proceedings. The 2 petition is, therefore, disposed of. However, the ad-interim order to continue for a period of four weeks, only to enable the petitioners to adopt appropriate proceedings. Needless to state that after the expiry of this period, the ad-interim order would automatically come to an end without any further reference to court. Needless to further add that no opinion is expressed on the maintainability or otherwise of the proceedings to be instituted and all contentions of both sides in that behalf are kept open. Petition disposed of. (S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J)