EXECUTION PROCEEDINGS
FEW POINTS ON LIMITATION TO REMEMBER
For delivery of possession by Court One year from the date of
Auction Purchase under Order 21 rule 95 CPC confirmation of Sale
For enforcement of a decree granting 3 years from the date of decree or
Mandatory Injunction under Or 21 R 32r/w 35CPC date fixed for performance.
(Article 135 Limitation Act)
For execution of any decree other than maintenance 12 years from the date of decree
decree, mandatory and perpetual injunction. Or Order becoming enforceable
(Article 136 Limitation Act)
To record an adjustment or satisfaction of a decree 30 days from the date of
under Or 21 R 2 CPC payment or adjustment.
(Article 125 Limitation Act)
For the payment of the amount due under decree 30 days from the date of decree
by installments under Or 21 R 11(2) CPC
To set aside sale in execution of decree including 60 days from the date of sale.
E.A. By JD. Or 21 R 89, 90 and Sec 47 CPC
Note:
For an EA under Or 21 R 89 CPC the time Supreme Court decision in
for deposit is 30 days from the date of sale. 1990 (1) M.L.J. 36 to 40
To set aside sale in cases relating to debts due on Any time before confirmation
Mortgage Deed. Of sale as per Or 34 R 5 CPC.
For redelivery of possession under Or 21 R 99 CPC 30 days from the date of dispossession
(Article 128 Limitation Act)
For removal of resistance or obstruction to delivery 30 days from the date of resistance
to delivery under Or 21 R 97 CPC or obstruction.
(Article 129 Limitation Act)
For execution of decree granting perpetual injunction No time limit prescribed.
Time limit for detention of an arrested JD in court Not exceeding 15 days. 1
st
proviso to
premises under custody of officer of court. Or 21 R 40 CPC. Form No. 14 A
Time limit for deposit of 1/4
th
sale proceeds Immediately after declaration of sale.
If DH is the purchaser may be
dispensed with.
Time limit for deposit of ¾
th
sale proceeds and 15 days from the date of sale
S.C. Charges (rule 94) or amount required for stamps Or 21 R 85 CPC.Time limit for payment (deposit) of any batta in Within 2 days or period if so fixed by
execution except sale warrant batta. the judge. (Rule 144 C.R.P.)
Time for payment of sale proclamation batta within 2 days from the date of order.
along with S.P. Copies and Tom Tom charges. Mandatory provision. Rule 187 CRP.
(Movables)
Time for payment of sale warrant batta. A week before date fixed for sale.
Mandatory provision Rule 187 CRP.
Return of decree of other courts entered in CR 15 Within 3 days after expiry of 1 year
if execution is not levied in execution court. Time from the date of receipt of other
court decree. (Date of transmission is
not the criteria. Rule 138 CRP)
Time for sale (Or 21 R 68 CPC) For immovables after expiry of 15
days from the date on which the copy
of proclamation is affixed on the
court notice board.
For movables it is 7 days.
These are some of the important points of limitation in execution proceedings.
TOP FIVE STRATEGIES FOR TIMELY JUSTICE IN EXECUTION PETITIONS
I. Filing / Limitation:
Limitation must be strictly followed. Specific period for different petitions.
(Vide separate sheet)
Section 5 limitation Act is not applicable in EP.
(2005) 4 MLJ 163 (SC)
Damodaran Pillai and others Vs South Indian Bank Limited
"An application under Sec. 5 of the Limitation Act is not maintainable in a proceeding
arising under O. 21, of the Code." "A fortiori for the said purpose, inherent power of the Court
cannot be invoked."
(2003) 3 MLJ 590 (Mad)
M.Ponnupandian Petitioner in both Vs Selvabakiyam and others Respondents in both
Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O. 21, Rule 106 and Sec.151 — Limitation Act (36 of
1963), Sec.5 — Application to set aside ex parte order under O. 21, Rule 106 — Application to
condone delay in filing said application — Delay cannot be condoned as Sec.5, Limitation Act
not applicable.II. NOTICE:
If below 2 years from decree no notice under Or 21 r 22 CPC be sent. Straight away orders
may be passed. i.e., “Notice and Attach by... “
In cases where the last orders in previous EP were passed within 2 years of fresh EP same
rule applicable. See Or 21 R22 Proviso.
Also see Or 21 r 22(2): “ notice not necessary if court feels that unreasonable delay will be
caused”
In cases of Salary attachment no notice to pay disbursing officer is necessary. It is
sufficient if attachment warrant alone is sent to him. He need not be added as respondent (as is
done in some places.)
If respondent fails to appear or does not file counter. Next order would be “Attachment
made absolute. EP allowed.”
III. Lrs in EP.
If EP filed against Lrs of JD, no separate application to implead them be filed along with
EP. Notice will be sent to Lrs and counter filed, Enquiry made and orders passed and then again
EP will be taken on file. Not necessary Waste of time It is sufficient if EP is filed u/o 21 r 11 r/w
sec 50 CPC.
If JD died pending EP, then application need be filed u/s 50 CPC. Order 22 rule 12 CPC to
be taken note of. Or 22 rules 3,4,8 not applicable to Execution proceedings. No abatement in EP.
Hence reasonable time be given to implead Lrs and if not EP may be dismissed for default. Since
no abatement is there fresh EP may be filed.
AIR 1932 Mad 73 FB MH
(Venkatachalam Vs Ramaswami)
“Rule 12 of Order 22 of CPC is envisaged to be of benefit to a decree holder. When
execution proceedings are pending, on account of death of party to proceedings, it does not abate.
The parties are entitled to be impleaded when execution proceedings are pending. There is also
no bar to file fresh application for execution also.”
1998 (1) CTC 509 MH
(UTHIRAPATHY Vs ASHRAB ALI & OTHERS)
“ This rule is intended to apply to the 'Proceedings under the Act : Execution petition by
virtue of fiction attached to it under sec.18 of the Act, is one under the code of civil procedure.
When Order of eviction is passed under secs. 10, 14, 15, 16 and 17 it ceased to be ceased to be
order under the Act. It has reached a stage of execution. So, rule 25 of the Act is not applicable
to proceedings of eviction. According to Rule 12 CPC also, the abatement of petition in execution
does not arise under Order 22 of CPC”.
Legal representatives are entitled to come on record in execution petition at any time.However, when execution petition is pending and, if the death of party is informed to Court, the
Court may fix a (date) time to implead the L R's. If petition is not filed, the Court can dismiss the
petition for default. Fresh application of execution is a continuation of execution petition.”
IV. STAY OF PROCEEDINGS:
This is where the proceedings get stuck without any progress. If we strictly follow the
provisions and the decisions of the HC and SC the delay would be considerably cut down and the
justice will be done in time.
1. Court cannot stay execution of its own decree: Only under Or 41 rule 5 CPC stay can be
granted by trial court, but for fixed time only
2. Or 21 rule 26 CPC can be invoked only by transferee court.
3. Or 21 rule 29 CPC for specific purpose when another suit is pending against the DH filed
by JD or other person interested in the same subject matter.
AIR 1978 MAD 269 (after amendment transferee court can also pass stay orders).
4. Stay by appellate courts Or 41 rule 5,6 CPC.
No stay can be granted if appeal is filed with delay condonation petition – Or 41 rule 3A.
In the absence of stay, EP must be proceeded with. Normally the parties would approach
the Executing court for stay u/s 151. But inherent powers cannot be invoked as per (2005)4
MLJ 163(SC) (Damodaran Pillai and others Vs South Indian Bank Ltd).
5. If court is satisfied that appeal is pending then no purpose in keeping the EP pending. EP
can be dismissed with liberty to file fresh EP after disposal of appeal. The limitation will
be saved since the decree will merge with the appellate court decree and the time will run
afresh after the disposal of the appeal.
6. In cases of Insolvency petitions pending in other courts.
Pendency of I.P. Proceedings is not a ground to stay the E.P. Executing court cannot stay
the proceedings since I.P. Is pending. The J.D. must obtain interim protection order from
the Insolvency Court.
2008 (4) LW 1068 Saravanan Vs Raju (Madurai Bench)
“CPC 51, 55, 58 Order 21 Rule 37, 40 CPC Merely because the J.D. Presented an I.P.
Before the Insolvency Court, the executing court need not stay in proceedings in the
absence of any adjudication by the Insolvency court. The J.D. Must obtain interim
protection order from the court.”
7. Sec. 47, Order 21 Rule 58, 59 Order 21 Rule 97 to 100, Order 21 Rule 105, 106 CPC.
Petitions will be filed under these provisions making various claim in the E.P. Early
disposal of these petitions will consequently reduce the delay in disposal of E.P.
(i) Section 47 :
The court cannot go behind the decree. Court can interfere only if the decree is null
and void without jurisdiction.
2007(4) MLJ 361 SC Dharsasingh Vs State of Punjab
2008(1) MLJ 1012 MHC District Collector, Thiruvannamalai Vs Jeayseelan(In this case Injunction decree obtained for granting of patta – No jurisdiction as it is bared
u/s 14 Tamil Nadu Patta Pass Book Act)
(ii) Section 47 Vs Order 21 Rule 2 CPC :
Any settlement or adjustment or discharge of decree has to be certified by the court
under Order 21 Rule 2 CPC. Time limit for invoking Order 21 Rule 2 CPC is 30 days
from the date of payment, adjustment or satisfaction (Article 125 Limitation Act).
The court cannot recognize any such adjustment or satisfaction if it is not certified
under Order 21 Rule 2. This prohibition is made under Order 21 Rule 3 “A payment or
adjustment which has not been certified or recorded as aforesaid shall not be
recognized by any court executing the decree”
Petitions will be filed u/s 47 claiming adjustment or satisfaction or record the said
adjustment or satisfaction u/s 47 CPC. Since specific provision under Order 21 Rule 2
and Rule 3 CPC is there the general provision of Sec. 47 not applicable.
2006(3) MLJ Page 57 (SC)
Padma Ben Banushali and another Vs Yogendra Rathore and Others
“Uncertified adjustment out of court cannot be considered u/s 47 CPC.”
(iii) Order 21 Rule 58, 59:
These petitions have to be dealt with immediately and with strict consideration of
limitation. Only if stay is granted under Order 21 Rule 59 E.P. must be stayed. These
petitions will be filed on the eve of sale confirmation. To be strictly scrutinized. They
would wantonly file incomplete petitions so as take advantage of the returns. We can
call the advocates and get them rectified immediately.
(iv) Order 21 Rule 97 to 100:
Removal of obstruction in cases of delivery.
Short adjournments shall be given and the proceedings shall be expedited.
8. Setting aside the sale: Order 21 Rule 72 Order 21 Rule 90 CPC.
(i). Order 21 Rule 72 :
The decree holder or his binami shall not bid or buy property in court auction sale without
permission from court. If the decree holder or his binami is found to have purchased the property
in court auction without permission or when permission is rejected, the sale has to be necessarily
set aside under Order 21 Rule 72(3). No substantial injury has to be proved by the J.D. or any
interested person, to set aside the sale as required under Order 21 Rule 90. If it is found that
Decree holder/Purchaser has not obtained necessary permission, the sale must be set aside.
1981 (1) MLJ Page 1 M H (F B)
(Suresh Babu Vs Balasubramaniam) “Sale is invalid even if no substantial injury is caused”.
(ii). Order 21 Rule 90:
Under this provision sale can be set aside only when substantial injury is pleaded
and proved. If the petitioner does not plead or prove that substantial injury is caused due to the
material irregularity in the conduct of sale, the sale need not be set aside. Mere irregularity is not
a ground to set aside the sale under Order 21 Rule 90 CPC.
AIR 2000 SC 3402
AIR 1986 SC 2099
V. General Delay:
1. Delay in paying Batta:
If batta is not paid within reasonable time E.P. may be dismissed. If already attachment is
made an order making attachment to continue for 3 months shall be made. This will reduce the
formality the second application. The second petition can be filed straight away for sale within
the period of 3 months.
2. P.S. In Installments:
The petition for payment of amount by installments must be made within 30 days from the
date of decree Order 21 Rule
The courts shall direct substantial payment as way of part satisfaction on regular hearings.
The courts shall be strict in enforcing payment since if small amounts are allowed to be paid it
will take more time and E.P. will pending.
3. Arrest Order 21 Rule 40:
Normally the court Amin will record and return the arrest warrant as “J.D. Absent”. Strict
instructions must be given to the bailiff as well the plaintiff to effect arrest and produce the J.D.
within reasonable time. Instances are there that the decree holder also colludes with the J.D. to
recover money from him instead of sending him to jail by paying batta. In such cases E.P. must be
dismissed.
On the event of arrest of J.D. And when he is produced before the court, the court has only
two options either to sentence him to civil prison on payment of Jail batta or to dismiss the E.P.
for non payment of batta. Eg. The D.H. Will be interested to record part satisfaction and directing
the J.D. to pay balance amount on the next hearing so as to avoid paying J.D. Batta. If such
practice is encouraged, the court will be blamed for pendency of E.Ps. If any amount is paid on
the event of arrest and if there is any balance amount the court cannot release the J.D. on
Muchalika, if the arrest order is passed after satisfaction of the requirements under Order 21 Rule
40.4. Sale Adjournment petitions Order 21 Rule 69 CPC.:
Long adjournment of sale should not be allowed. The petitioner must fore go fresh
proclamation when seeks sale adjournment under Order 21 rule 69 CPC it should be mentioned in
the affidavit and petition. Short adjournment like two weeks or three weeks alone shall be
granted for sale. If substantial amount is paid as part satisfaction.
These are some of the strategies that I follow to achieve speedy disposal and timely justice
while disposing Execution Petitions. When I took charge of the DM/JM court, Bodi on 5.5.2008
there were 137 Execution Petitions pending. After that 57 Execution Petitions were instituted and
97 were disposed during the last one year. At present there are 97 Execution Petitions pending for
disposal.
Presented in the workshop on “Planning and Management for Timely Justice for Civil
Judges (Junior Division) functioning in the Districts of Madurai, Sivaganga, Ramanathapuram,
Theni, Dindigul, and Virudhunagar conducted on 11.07.2009. by A.K. Mehbub Alikhan, DM/JM,
Bodinaickanur, Theni District.
No comments:
Post a Comment