Trending :
Lawtext
Search
Login / Register
Sign In
HomeJudgement
Scroll Down To Discover
Supreme Court

Supreme Court Allows Execution of Decree Despite Pending Appeal: Abatement of Appeal Against Deceased Defendants Renders Appeal Ineffective. Legal Heir of Original Decree-Holder Entitled to Execute Trial Court Decree Where Appeal Against Deceased Defendants Abated Under Order 22 Rule 3 CPC.

Admin
2026-07-16 02:15:16
  • 55
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Details

2025 INSC 1283

Civil Appeal arising out of SLP(Civil) No. 9947 of 2024

2025-01-01

Atul S. Chandurkar

2025 INSC 1283

Vikram Bhalchandra Ghongade

The State of Maharashtra & Ors.

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Civil appeal against order of executing court refusing execution of decree

Remedy Sought

Execution of trial court decree dated 14.08.2006 in RCS No.181 of 2001

Filing Reason

Executing court refused to execute decree on ground that appeal against decree had not abated despite death of appellants

Previous Decisions

Trial court decreed suit on 14.08.2006; first appeal filed by defendant Nos.4 and 5; appellate court decided appeal on merits and modified decree; executing court refused execution

Issues

Whether the appeal against defendant Nos.4 and 5 abated upon their death and failure to bring LRs on record? Whether the executing court can refuse execution of trial court decree on the ground that the appeal has not abated?

Submissions/Arguments

Appellant argued that the appeal against deceased defendants abated as LRs were not brought on record, making trial court decree final and executable. Respondents argued that the appeal was decided on merits and thus the trial court decree could not be executed.

Ratio Decidendi

Where an appeal is filed against a decree and the appellants die, the appeal abates as against them if their legal representatives are not brought on record within the prescribed period. The appellate court cannot proceed to decide the appeal on merits without bringing the LRs on record. The trial court decree becomes final and executable against the deceased appellants. The executing court cannot refuse execution on the ground that the appeal has not abated.

Judgment Excerpts

The executing Court has, however, refused to permit execution of the decree passed by the trial Court on the ground that the appeal preferred by the defendant Nos.4 and 5 could not be stated to have abated notwithstanding the death of defendant Nos.4 and 5 prior to hearing of the first appeal. The appeal against the deceased defendants had abated and the appellate court could not have proceeded to decide the appeal on merits without bringing the LRs on record.

Procedural History

Trial court decreed suit on 14.08.2006. Defendant Nos.4 and 5 filed first appeal. During pendency, they died. LRs not brought on record. Appellate court decided appeal on merits and modified decree. Appellant filed execution application. Executing court refused execution. Appellant filed SLP before Supreme Court. Supreme Court granted leave and allowed appeal.

Acts & Sections

  • Code of Civil Procedure, 1908: Order 22 Rule 3, Section 47, Order 21 Rule 16
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Tags :
abatement of appeal execution of decree legal heir Order 22 CPC Section 47 CPC

Pay once for this file or subscribe for unlimited downloads

Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Quashes Cancellation of Teacher's Membership in University Councils. University's Action Held Arbitrary and Without Authority Under Maharashtra Universities Act, 1994. 2026-07-16 02:15:16
Related Judgement
High Court High Court of Bombay at Nagpur Dismisses Appeals by NWKRTC in Motor Accident Claims — Liability of Owner and Insurer Upheld. The court held that the driver of the offending vehicle was not negligent and the accident was caused solely by the neglige... 2026-07-16 02:15:16
Categories
Popular Tags
writ petition acquittal natural justice murder compensation burden of proof benefit of doubt Limitation circumstantial evidence land acquisition
Follow Us

Bombay High Court Dismisses NHAI Appeals in Land Acquisition Compensation Dispute — Upho...

Madras High Court Dismisses Second Appeal in Partition Suit — Concurrent Findings of Fac...

High Court of Bombay at Bombay Dismisses Insurance Company's Appeal in Motor Accident Clai...

Bombay High Court Quashes Reassessment Notice Under Section 148 of Income Tax Act, 1961 fo...

High Court of Karnataka Allows EPF Organisation's Writ Petition for Priority Payment of Pr...

Supreme Court Allows Appeal of Claimant in Motor Accident Case — Functional Disability A...

Supreme Court Modifies Sentence in Forgery Case Due to Long Pendency and No Criminal Antec...

Supreme Court Dismisses Writ Petition Challenging Rejection of Rajya Sabha Nomination Due ...

Supreme Court Allows Pension to Casual Labourers with Temporary Status in Department of Po...

Supreme Court Directs Eviction of Encroachers and Restoration of Forest Lands in Tamil Nad...

Lost Your Password?