1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 5574 OF 2009 (The State of Maharashtra & Anr. vs. Umashankar (deceased) through LRs Ramkant Umashankar Khetan & 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. FEBRUARY 10, 2010. Heard Mrs. Khade, learned AGP for the petitioners – judgment debtors and Shri Mehadia, learned counsel for respondent No.1 - decree holder. I am finding it difficult to appreciate rival contentions on calculations as effected. The respondent is a land owner whose reference under Section 18 of Land Acquisition Act, preferred while Land Acquisition Case No. 93 of 1967 was allowed on 17.07.1991 by District Judge, Akola, holding him entitled to amount of Rs.1,69,387/-. The interest at 10% was allowed only on Rs.1,08,745/- till realization. This order is being executed by the respondent by filing Regular Darkhast. In it, he has moved application for amendment and the impugned order shows addition of solatium at 30%, interest at 12% etc. which prima facie does not appear to be correct. The balance due to the respondent has been worked out to Rs.7,94,387/-. 2 Looking to the order which is to be executed, I find the entire exercise vitiated. The petitioner could not assist the Executing Court appropriately in the matter. Hence, without observing anything more and in the interest of justice, impugned order dated 29.04.2006 is quashed and set aside. The contentions being raised are kept open for consideration by the Executing Court in accordance with law. Writ Petition is disposed of. Rule accordingly. No order as to costs. JUDGE *GS.