Cruelty Need Not Be Physical: Mental Agony and Emotional Distress Are Sufficient Grounds for Divorce: Supreme Court Section 195 Cr.P.C. | Tribunals Are Not Courts: Private Complaints for Offences Like False Evidence Valid: Supreme Court Limitation | Right to Appeal Is Fundamental, Especially When Liberty Is at Stake: Supreme Court Condones 1637-Day Delay FIR Quashed | No Mens Rea, No Crime: Supreme Court Emphasizes Protection of Public Servants Acting in Good Faith Trademark | Passing Off Rights Trump Registration Rights: Delhi High Court A Minor Procedural Delay Should Not Disqualify Advances as Export Credit When Exports Are Fulfilled on Time: Bombay HC Preventive Detention Must Be Based on Relevant and Proximate Material: J&K High Court Terrorism Stems From Hateful Thoughts, Not Physical Abilities: Madhya Pradesh High Court Denies Bail of Alleged ISIS Conspiracy Forwarding Offensive Content Equals Liability: Madras High Court Upholds Conviction for Derogatory Social Media Post Against Women Journalists Investigation by Trap Leader Prejudiced the Case: Rajasthan High Court Quashes Conviction in PC Case VAT | Notice Issued Beyond Limitation Period Cannot Reopen Assessment: Kerala High Court Fishing Inquiry Not Permissible Under Section 91, Cr.P.C.: High Court Quashes Trial Court’s Order Directing CBI to Produce Unrelied Statements and Case Diary Vague and Omnibus Allegations Cannot Sustain Criminal Prosecution in Matrimonial Disputes: Calcutta High Court High Court Emphasizes Assessee’s Burden of Proof in Unexplained Cash Deposits Case Effective, efficient, and expeditious alternative remedies have been provided by the statute: High Court Dismisses Petition for New Commercial Electricity Connection Permissive Use Cannot Ripen into Right of Prescriptive Easement: Kerala High Court High Court Slams Procedural Delays, Orders FSL Report in Assault Case to Prevent Miscarriage of Justice Petitioner Did Not Endorse Part-Payments on Cheque; Section 138 NI Act Not Attracted: Madras High Court Minority Christian Schools Not Bound by Rules of 2018; Disciplinary Proceedings Can Continue: High Court of Calcutta Absence of Receipts No Barrier to Justice: Madras High Court Orders Theft Complaint Referral Under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C Rajasthan High Court Emphasizes Rehabilitation, Grants Probation to 67-Year-Old Convicted of Kidnapping" P&H High Court Dismisses Contempt Petition Against Advocate Renuka Chopra: “A Frustrated Outburst Amid Systemic Challenges” Kerala High Court Criticizes Irregularities in Sabarimala Melsanthi Selection, Orders Compliance with Guidelines Non-Payment of Rent Does Not Constitute Criminal Breach of Trust: Calcutta High Court Administrative Orders Cannot Override Terminated Contracts: Rajasthan High Court Affirms in Landmark Decision Minimum Wage Claims Must Be Resolved by Designated Authorities Under the Minimum Wages Act, Not the Labour Court: Punjab and Haryana High Court Madras High Court Confirms Equal Coparcenary Rights for Daughters, Emphasizes Ancestral Property Rights Home Station Preferences Upheld in Transfer Case: Kerala High Court Overrules Tribunal on Teachers' Transfer Policy Failure to Formally Request Cross-Examination Does Not Invalidate Assessment Order: Calcutta High Court

Supreme Court Addresses Historic Delays and Abuse in Execution Proceedings: Res Judicata Principle Applicable in Execution

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court of India has tackled the issue of prolonged delays and abuse of the execution process in a recent judgment dated October 30, 2023. The case highlights the dire situation where execution proceedings under Order XXI of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) have been subjected to extensive delays, causing considerable hardship to decree holders.

The apex court’s judgment emphasizes the critical need to address these delays and prevent the misuse of the execution process. It starts by quoting a historical observation made in the judgment, stating, “The difficulties of a litigant in India begin when he has obtained a decree.” This observation underscores the longstanding issue of delays in the execution of decrees.

The case in question involved a landlord seeking eviction of tenants due to non-payment of rent, resulting in a consent decree in 2005. The decree permitted eviction if the tenants failed to pay rent for two consecutive months. However, the execution of this decree faced significant delays.

The central point of contention revolved around the execution order issued on February 12, 2013, which was challenged by the judgment debtors nearly four years later. The executing court initially rejected this challenge, citing maintainability, but the judgment debtors succeeded in revision. Subsequently, an appeal reached the Bombay High Court.

The Supreme Court observed that the res judicata principle applied in this case since the initial execution order was never contested, and thus, it had attained finality. The Court noted, “An execution proceeding works in different stages, and if the judgment debtors have failed to take an objection and have allowed the preliminary stage to come to an end, they cannot raise the objection subsequently.”

The apex court criticized the delays in the case, which had dragged on for almost two decades. It expressed concern over the misuse of the execution process and emphasized that execution proceedings were meant to be a “handmaid of justice” but were often misused to obstruct justice.

Quoting a relevant case law (Rahul S. Shah v. Jinendra Kumar Gandhi and Others), the Supreme Court condemned the abuse of process in execution proceedings and directed all civil courts to expedite execution. The Court also urged High Courts to update their rules relating to execution to ensure timely enforcement of decrees.

Supreme Court set aside the orders of the appellate court and the High Court, upholding the executing court’s order from September 28, 2017. The executing court was directed to complete the execution within six months.

This landmark judgment highlights the need for timely execution of decrees, the importance of res judicata in execution proceedings, and the Supreme Court’s commitment to addressing delays and abuse in the execution process.

Date of Decision: 30 October 2023

PRADEEP MEHRA VS HARIJIVAN J. JETHWA (SINCE DECEASED THR. LRS.) & ORS 

 

Similar News