ORDER :

As the issue involved in this batch of Civil Revision Petitions is identical, the same are disposed of by this Common Order.

2. The petitioners in all these cases are the Judgment debtors. The respective respondents/Decree holders/plaintiffs filed individual suits seeking refund of advance amount paid pursuant to different Agreements of Sale executed in their favour by the petitioners/Judgment debtors, which were decreed on different dates. The petitioners preferred appeals against the Judgments and also moved stay petitions. The respondents/Decree holders filed petitions seeking Execution of their respective decrees under Order XXI, Rules 54 and 66 of the Code of Civil Procedure (for short ‘CPC’). The details of date of decrees, date of filing of Execution Petitions( for short ‘E.Ps’.) and date of attachment orders passed thereon by the Executing Court, for ready reference is tabulated below :

3. It may be noted here that along with the Execution Petitions, a note was appended by the counsel for respondents/Decree holders stating that in view of the Order passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Suo Motu Writ Petition (Civil) No.3 of 2020, issuance of notice under Order XXI, Rule 22 of CPC is not necessary. The same was reiterated in the affidavit filed in support of the Execution Petitions. The learned Executing Court considering the note appended to the Execution Petitions and averments in the affidavit in support of the E.Ps., issued notice under Rule 54 of CPC, on payment of process.

4. Aggrieved by the said docket orders, the above said batch of Civil Revision Petitions came to be filed.

5. Heard Mr. B.S.Reddy, learned counsel for the Revision Petitioners/Judgment debtors and Mr.V.R.Reddy Kovvuri, learned counsel for the respondents/Decree holders.

6. Referring to the lead case C.R.P.No.335 of 2021, the learned counsel for the petitioners/Judgment debtors contends that the O.S.No.86 of 2014 was decreed against the petitioners on 29.10.2018 and the E.P., was filed on 23.01.2021 i.e., two years after passing of the decree and therefore, notice is mandatory in terms of Order XXI, Rule 22 of CPC. He submits that no notice, was issued to the petitioners/Judgment debtors and therefore, the Orders under Revision are liable to be set aside on that ground. He would further submit that Order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in SuoMotuWrit Petition (Civil) No.3 of 2020, had no application to the case on hand and the limitation for filing of Execution Petitions under Article