therein.
3. The applicants/decree holders filed an execution application, being Regular Darkhast No. 19 of 1984, in the Court of Civil Judge, Junior Division ... March 1996. for restoration of Regular Darkhast No. 19 of 1984 which, ultimately, came to be dismissed by an order dated 31st March 1998 inter
that the aforesaid decree was sought to be executed by filing Regular Darkhast No. 227/92. An objection was raised by the present applicants ... competent Civil Court. The proceedings of Regular Civil Suit No. 32/ 70, Regular Darkhast Nos. 227/92 and 329/96 are between the same parties
Regular Civil Suit No. 312 of 1950. In execution of this decree, he filed Regular Darkhast No. 511 of 1954. In this Darkhast, the plot ... disposing of the Darkhast the Court did not direct the attachment to continue. Thereafter, defendant No.1 filed second Darkhast being Regular Darkhast
Joint Civil Judge, Junior Division,
Parali Vaijinath, below Exhibit-115 in Regular
Darkhast No. 55 of 2004 and order dated 15th
December, 2010 (Annexure ... Joint
Civil Judge, Junior Division, Parali Vaijinath,
below Exhibit-1 in Regular Darkhast No. 44 of 2004
thereby dismissing the Execution Petition on the
point
Civil Judge, Junior
Division, Ausa, District Latur/executing court in Regular Darkhast
::: Uploaded on - 28/04/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 29/04/2020 ... aside the order dated 04.07.2012 passed below Exhibit 178 in
Regular Darkhast No.18 of 1981 and to dismiss the said application
and also
Civil Judge, Junior
Division, Ausa, District Latur/executing court in Regular Darkhast
::: Uploaded on - 28/04/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 29/04/2020 ... aside the order dated 04.07.2012 passed below Exhibit 178 in
Regular Darkhast No.18 of 1981 and to dismiss the said application
and also
Civil Judge, Junior
Division, Ausa, District Latur/executing court in Regular Darkhast
::: Uploaded on - 28/04/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 29/04/2020 ... aside the order dated 04.07.2012 passed below Exhibit 178 in
Regular Darkhast No.18 of 1981 and to dismiss the said application
and also
said application, the petitioners raised
objection as to maintainability of regular darkhast No.38 of 2006 with
contention that the respondents could have got restored ... regular
darkhast No.70 of 2001 which was dismissed in default. In order to avoid
the controversy, the learned counsel for the respondents made
disposed of the Application preferred by
the Petitioner praying that the regular Darkhast
No.33/1977 cannot proceed in view of the subsequent
::: Downloaded ... 2013 14:23:12 :::
: 2 :
events. The regular Darkhast No.33/1977 was the
outcome of the ex-parte decree passed in favour
Joint Civil Judge, Junior Division, Nagpur below Exh. 1 in Regular Darkhast No. 25/1995 whereby Executing Court issued warrant of possession against the present ... legal heirs of original defendant No. 3 deceased Pralhad Akre) filed Regular Darkhast No. 25/1995 for issuance of warrant of possession against the applicants
