Periyammal (Dead) vs V. Rajamani 2025 INSC 329 - Execution Petitions Delay- Order XXI Rule 97 -101 CPC - S. 47 CPC

Code of Civil Procedure 1908 - Execution Petitions -Long and inordinate delay at the end of the Executing Courts across the country in deciding execution petitions - The mandatory direction requiring the execution proceedings to be completed within six months from the date of filing reiterated - Directions issued: High Courts across the country to call for the necessary information from their respective district judiciary as regards pendency of the execution petitions. Once the data is collected by each of the High Courts, the High Courts shall thereafter proceed to issue an administrative order or circular, directing their respective district judiciary to ensure that the execution petitions pending in various courts shall be decided and disposed of within a period of six months without fail otherwise the concerned presiding officer would be answerable to the High Court on its administrative side. Once the entire data along with the figures of pendency and disposal thereafter, is collected by all the High Courts, the same shall be forwarded to the Registry of this Court with individual reports.

Code of Civil Procedure 1908 - Section 47 with Order XXI Rule 101 - The questions relating to right, title or interest in a decretal property must be related to the execution, discharge or satisfaction of the decree. The import of such a reading of the provisions is that only matters arising subsequent to the passing of the decree can be determined by an executing court under Section 47 and Order XXI Rule 101.- The issues that ought to have been raised by the parties during the adjudication of the original suit cannot be determined by the executing court as such adjudication may undermine the decree itself- benefit of Section 47 cannot be availed to conduct a retrial causing failure of realisation of fruits of the decree. (Para 62- 63)

Code of Civil Procedure 1908 - Section 47 with Order XXI Rule 97 - Section 47 is a general provision whereas Order XXI Rules 97 and 101 deal with a specific situation. Moreover, Section 47 deals with executions of all kinds of decrees whereas Order XXI, Rules 97 and 101 deal only with execution of decree for possession -Even an application filed under Section 47 would be treated as an application under Order XXI Rule 97 and an adjudication is required to be conducted under Rule 98. Dispossession of the applicant from the property is not a condition for declining to entertain the application. (Para 52-54)

Code of Civil Procedure 1908 - Order XXI Rule 97 -101- Rules 97 to 101 deal with situation when execution is obstructed or resisted by “any person” claiming right, title or interest in the property. The words “any person” include even a stranger to a decree resisting the decree of possession as not being bound by a decree or by claiming independent right, title or interest to the property. Rule 97 not only provides remedy to a decree holder in obtaining possession of an immovable property but also to a stranger who obstructs or resists delivery of possession of the property by claiming derivative title from the judgment debtor or independent right, title or interest in the decretal property. Whereas, Rule 99 gives right to a third party claiming right, title or interest in the property to seek restoration of the decretal property. Suffice it to say that the remedy under Rule 99 is available when a person claiming right to the decretal property is already dispossessed. (Para 49)

Update:

Suggested Readings:

LawLens - AI-Driven Legal Research for Indian Laws

Discover AI-powered legal research tools for Indian law professionals

AI-Driven Legal Research for Indian Laws