IMPORTANT POINT
The doctrine of merger applies to the computation of limitation for filing an execution application, and the decree of the Trial Court merges with that of the Appellate Court.

ORDER ON BOARD :

1. This Revision has been filed by the applicant/plaintiff/judgment debtor being aggrieved with the order dated 16.01.2024 passed by the First Civil Judge, Class-I, Bastar, Jagdalpur (CG) in Civil Suit No.01/2017, whereby, the application preferred by them raising objection that execution petition was timed barred, has been rejected.

2. Brief facts of the case are that the applicant/plaintiff/judgment debtor filed a Civil Suit on 14.04.1987 seeking relief of declaration of title, possession and permanent injunction over the suit property. In the said suit, the non-applicant/defendant/preliminary decree holder filed a written statement and counter claim seeking half share of the suit property. However, the said suit was dismissed and counter claim of the defendant was decreed and a preliminary decree was passed in favour of the defendant vide judgment and decree dated 18.07.1991 passed in Civil Suit No.27-A/1989 (Annexure-A/5). Against the said judgment and decree, the plaintiff preferred Civil Appeal No.7-A/1991 which was dismissed vide judgment dated 15.11.1995 (Annexure-A/6). Thereafter, the plaintiff preferred Second Appeal No.828/1995, however, the same was also dismissed vide judgment dated 09.02.2012 (Annexure-A/7).

3. On 31.01.2017 the defendant moved an application under Section 54 of the CPC r/w Order 20 Rule 18 for execution of the judgment and decree dated 18.07.1991, in which, the plaintiff had moved an application under Section 47 of the CPC raising a ground that the execution proceeding is barred by limitation as the judgment and decree passed by the Civil Court was stayed during the pendency of Appeal, which was well within the knowledge of the defendant/decree holder. It was also stated that execution proceedings were instituted after 25 years 6 months and 13 days. However, by the impugned order, the said objection was rejected. Hence, this revision has been filed for quashing of the impugned order.

4. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and perused the record carefully.

5. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of Surinder Pal Soni Vs. Sohan Lal, (2020) 15 SCC 771 held that the doctrine of merger applies to a situation when the limitation for filing of an execution application is to be computed. There was a merger of the judgment of the trial Court with the decision which was rendered in appeal. It was also observed that consequent upon the passing of the decree of an appellate court, the decree of the trial court merges with that of the appellate court. This Court deems it appropriate to reproduce the relevant portion of the aforesaid judgment, which reads thus:-

“11. Upon the decision of the Appellate Court, there was a merger of the judgment of the Trial Court with the decision which was rendered in appeal. Consequent upon the passing of the decree of an Appellate Court, the decree of the Trial Court merges with that of the Appellate Court. The doctrine of merger is founded on the rationale that there cannot be more than one operative decree at a given point in time. The doctrine of merger applies irrespective of whether the Appellate Court has affirmed, modified or reversed the decree of the Trial Court. In Kunhayammed v State of Kerala [(2000) 6 SCC 359, para 12], while explaining the doctrine of merger, this Court held thus:

“12. The logic underlying the doctrine of merger is that there cannot be more than one decree or operative orders governing the same subject-matter at a given point of time. When a decree or order passed by an inferior court, tribunal or authority was subjected to a remedy available under the law before a superior forum then, though the decree or order under challenge continues to be effective and binding, nevertheless its finality is put in jeopardy. Once the superior court has disposed of the lis before it either way — whether the decree or order under appeal is set aside or modified or simply confirmed, it is the decree or order of the superior court, tribunal or au