1 973 WP 6020-2021.odt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD 973 WRIT PETITION NO. 6020 OF 2021 MAHANANDA GANESH MENKUDLE AND OTHERS VERSUS FAKIR MAHEMEUD SHAIKH AND OTHERS … Mr. Shivprasad G. Jadhavar – Advocate for Petitioners … CORAM : SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J. DATE : 17.01.2026 PER COURT : 1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioners. 2. By way of present petition, the petitioners challenge the order dated 15.03.2021 passed below Exhibit-59 in Civil Misc. Application No.132/2016 by the learned 3rd Joint Civil Judge, Junior Division, Osmanabad, whereby the application filed by the petitioners under Order XXI Rule 97 of the Civil Procedure Code came to be rejected. 3. Learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that defendant No.3 had already expired prior to the passing of the decree and that the present petitioners are his legal heirs. On that ground, it is contended that the decree itself is a nullity and therefore the objections raised by the petitioners before the Executing Court ought to have been entertained. 2026:BHC-AUG:1799 2 973 WP 6020-2021.odt 4. The learned Trial Court, however observed that such objections touching the validity of the decree are not maintainable in execution proceedings and that it is for the petitioners to challenge the decree dated 18.03.2016 before the appropriate forum. The question regarding validity of the decree and all consequential issues are required to be considered by the appellate Court and not in the present proceedings. I am of the considered view that reasons recorded by the Executing Court are proper and warrant no interference by this Court, therefore, I am not inclined to entertain the present petition. 5. However, it is clarified that the petitioners are at liberty to raise all permissible grounds before the appellate Court. 6. The Writ Petition stands disposed of in above terms. [ SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE ] JUDGE Pooja Kale/