Court ruled there was no merit in staying execution of a decree despite the presence of orphans on the property, emphasizing the prolonged nature of the proceedings and previous judicial decisions.

Order :

SUBHENDU SAMANTA, J.

The instant Civil Revision Petition has been preferred against the order, dated 17.11.2021 passed in E.A.No.178/2020 in E.P.No.5/2007 in O.S.No.15/2000 on the file of the learned III Additional District Judge, Kakinada.

2. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that the State of Andhra Pradesh being the judgment debtor filed an application before the learned executing Court under Order 21 Rule 29 read with Section 151 CPC for granting stay of all further proceedings in E.A.No.177/2019 in E.P.No.5/2007; the affidavit in support of their E.A. contended that O.S.Nos.241/2018, 250/2018 and 251/2018 are pending before the Court of Law, which contains the property under execution. It is further contended by the learned counsel for the respondents that more than 132 orphans are residing in the suit schedule property, which is under determination of the learned appropriate Court in those suits, on the basis of such affidavit, the State of A.P. has filed an application for stay of execution proceedings. Learned counsel for the respondents further argued that in other suits bearing O.S.Nos.249/2018, 250/2018 and 251/2018 have already been decreed in favour of the respondents by three separate orders, dated 01.07.2025. It is his contention there is no merit exist in the CRP and it is liable to be dismissed as infructuous.

3. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the judgment debtor/petitioner submits that the other suits being O.S.Nos.249/2018, 250/2018 and 251/2018 were decreed and disposed of, against such decree dated 01.07.2025, the State has already preferred an appeal in A.S.(Sr)Nos.1265, 1281 and 1286 of 2026. It is further contended by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners that the issue never been properly appraised to the Court on merit but the same was dismissed on some technical ground. She further submits that 200 orphans are residing in an orphanage over the property under execution, if the execution allowed to be proceeded the fate of the orphans would be at jeopardy.

4. Heard learned counsel for the parties. Perused the impugned order passed by the learned Court below.

5. The learned Court below, in not deciding the application for stay filed by the State of A.P./petitioners/judgment debtors, is of the opinion that the matter was initially approached to the Hon’ble High Court, thereafter, it was proceeded to the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Special Leave Petition and thereafter one review petition was preferred and was also one curative petition was preferred by State of A.P., which are also turned down by the Apex Court. Learned Court below also of opinion that issue involved in O.S.No.249, 250 and 251 of 2018 is distinct and separate to execution proceeding in question.

6. It further appears that the issue regarding orphanage over the property under execution is not new one, it is pending since long time; now again, the State of Andhra Pradesh has raised such issue. Courts time and again has disproved the plea of the State of A.P. However, I refrain myself into the merits of the case, the civil revision preferred against the order, dated 17.11.2021 in E.P.No.5/2007, the execution proceeding is pending since 2007 now we are proceeding the year 2026, about 20 years have been elapsed, no steps have been taken by the Government to shift orphanage from the suit schedule premises to elsewhere.

7. Considering the entire aspect, though some appeal has been preferred, I find no appeals are ever admitted or existence of any order of stay, consequently, the decree passed by the learned Court below in other suits are in existence. Accordingly, I find no merit to proceed further