JUDGMENT :

Sandeep K Shinde, J.

Heard learned Counsel for the parties.

2. The petitioner in both the petitions is the judgment debtor in the suit for specific performance instituted by respondent no.1 herein. The petitioners (defendants) were directed by the trial Court to execute the sale-deed of the suit land in favour of the plaintiffs after obtaining necessary permission of the Competent Authority within six months after accepting the amount of Rs.5,000/- from the plaintiffs. The decree has been confirmed in modified form by the First Appellate Court and the Second Appeal arising therefrom has been dismissed by this Court.

3. The decree holders (respondents) instituted Regular Darkhast which the judgment debtors objected to on the ground that the plaintiffs did not claim possession of the suit property and in absence thereof, the decree is unexecutable and thus possession cannot be delivered to the decree holders. The said objection has been overruled by the executing court on 4th April, 2015. It is against this order, Writ Petition No. 6348 of 2015 is preferred.

4. Pending petition, on 22nd September, 2016 this Court passed the following order :

"In view of the objection raised by P