Sale Deeds Must Be Interpreted Literally When the Language is Clear and Unambiguous: Supreme Court    |     Non-Signatory Can Be Bound by Arbitration Clause Based on Conduct and Involvement: Supreme Court    |     Right to Passport is a Fundamental Right, Denial Without Justification Violates Article 21: Allahabad High Court    |     Insurance Company's Liability Remains Despite Policy Cancellation Due to Dishonored Cheque: Calcutta High Court    |     Deductions Under Sections 36(1)(vii) and 36(1)(viia) of the Income Tax Act Are Independent and Cannot Be Curtailed: Bombay High Court    |     Diary Entries Cannot Alone Implicate the Accused Without Corroborative Evidence: Supreme Court Upholds Discharge of Accused in Corruption Case    |     MACT | Fraud Vitiates All Judicial Acts, Even Without Specific Review Powers: Rajasthan High Court    |     Right of Private Defense Cannot Be Weighed in Golden Scales: Madhya Pradesh High Court Acquits Appellant in Culpable Homicide Case    |     If Two Reasonable Conclusions Are Possible, Acquittal Should Not Be Disturbed: Supreme Court    |     Kalelkar Award Explicitly Provides Holiday Benefits for Temporary Employees, Not Subject to Government Circulars: Supreme Court Upholds Holiday and Overtime Pay    |     NDPS | Homogeneous Mixing of Bulk Drugs Essential for Valid Sampling Under NDPS Act: Punjab & Haryana High Court    |     Pre-Arrest Bail Not a Right but an Exception: Himachal High Court Denied Bail In Dowry Death Case"    |     POCSO | Scholar Register Is Sufficient to Determine Victim’s Age in POCSO Cases: Madhya Pradesh High Court    |     Abuse of Official Position in Appointments: Prima Facie Case for Criminal Misconduct: Delhi High Court Upholds Framing of Charges Against Swati Maliwal in DCW Corruption Case    |     Service Law | Similarly Situated Employees Cannot Be Denied Equal Treatment: PH High Court Orders Regularization    |     Presumption of Innocence Remains Supreme Unless Clearly Overturned: PH High Court Affirming Acquittal    |     Any Physical Liaison with A Girl Of Less Than Eighteen Years Is A Strict Offense.: Patna High Court Reiterates Strict Stance On Sexual Offences Against Minors    |     Orissa High Court Rules Res Judicata Inapplicable When Multiple Appeals Arise from Same Judgment    |     Mandatory Section 80 Notice Cannot Be Bypassed Lightly:  Jammu & Kashmir High Court Returns Plaint for Non-Compliance    |     Bombay High Court Denies Permanent Lecturer Appointment for Failing to Meet UGC Eligibility Criteria at Time of Appointment    |     Deferred Cross-Examination Gave Time for Witness Tampering, Undermining Fair Trial: Allahabad High Court    |     Dowry Death | Presumption Under Section 113-B Not Applicable as No Proof of Cruelty Soon Before Death : Supreme Court    |     Gift Deed Voided as Son Fails to Care for Elderly Mother, Karnataka High Court Asserts ‘Implied Duty’ in Property Transfers    |     Denial of a legible 164 statement is a denial of a fair trial guaranteed by the Constitution of India: Kerala High Court    |     Safety Shoes Used as Weapon Meets Mens Rea Requirement for Murder: Rajasthan HC on Bail Denial    |     Fraud on the Courts Cannot Be Tolerated: Supreme Court Ordered CBI Investigation Against Advocate    |     Land Acquisition | Jaiprakash Associates Ltd. (JAL) Liable for Compensation under Supplementary Award, Not Ultra-Tech Cement Ltd.: Supreme Court    |     Non-Mentioning of Bail Orders in Detention Reflects Clear Non-Application of Mind: J&K High Court Quashes Preventive Detention Order    |     Conviction Under Arms Act and Criminal Conspiracy Quashed Due to Non-Seizure of Key Evidence and Failure to Prove Ownership of Box: Jharkhand High Court    |     Prima Facie Proof of Valid Marriage Required Before Awarding Maintenance Under Section 125 Cr.P.C: Calcutta High Court Sets Aside Interim Maintenance Order    |    

Execution Court’s Orders in Contravention of High Court’s Interim Stay are a Nullity and Set Aside – Andhra Pradesh High Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Andhra Pradesh High Court at Amaravati addressed procedural irregularities and the legality of an auction sale concerning property following the execution of a decree against petitioner Tirumuru @ Tirumudi Jithendra Reddy. The bench, led by Justice Ninala Jayasurya, dealt with civil revision petitions (CRP Nos. 959 of 2020, 2618, and 2621 of 2023) challenging the decisions of the Executing Court which had been passed in contradiction to the High Court’s interim stay orders.

The case revolved around the execution of a decree obtained by Devaram Rajeswaramma against Tirumuru based on promissory notes, leading to the auction of the petitioner’s property. CRP No. 959 of 2020 contested the dismissal of an application to set aside the auction sale due to alleged procedural irregularities and fraud. CRP Nos. 2618 and 2621 of 2023 challenged the orders confirming the auction sale and the dismissal of an application for setting aside the auction upon deposit of the decretal amount, respectively.

Tirumuru’s challenges arose following an auction held on October 22, 2018, where the property was bought by the decree holder’s mother, alleged to be a fraudulent transaction. The High Court had previously granted an interim stay on further proceedings, which the Executing Court overlooked, leading to the current appeals.

Justice Jayasurya clarified that CRP No. 959 of 2020 was dismissed as it was not maintainable because an appeal lies against the orders of dismissing an application to set aside an auction under Order 21 Rule 90 of the Code of Civil Procedure. However, regarding CRP Nos. 2618 and 2621 of 2023, the court found that the Executing Court had acted in contravention of the High Court’s interim stay orders.

The judgment meticulously pointed out that the Executing Court should not have proceeded with the applications under Order 21 Rule 89 and Rule 92 of the CPC during the pendency of an effective stay order. Therefore, the orders challenged in CRP Nos. 2618 and 2621 of 2023 were deemed null and void, set aside by the High Court.

The Andhra Pradesh High Court’s decision emphasizes the critical nature of adhering to interim orders and underscores the sanctity of procedural laws that govern judicial proceedings. The judgment reinstates the principle that executing courts must align their actions within the bounds set by higher judicial authorities.

Date of Decision: 8th May 2024

Tirumuru @ Tirumudi Jithendra Reddy vs. Devaram Rajeswaramma, Devalla Ramanamma

Similar News