A.B. Pal, J.

1. In all the above civil revision petitions, the same question in similar factual premises having arisen, I propose to dispose of them by this common judgment.

2. The background facts in brief are as follows:

One Akhil Chandra Ghosh, the predecessors-in-interest of the present petitioners instituted several suits for declaration of title and recovery of possession against the predecessors-in-interest of the respondents herein which were decreed on contest or ex parte in his favour. The said suits were decreed on different dates between 1961 to 1966. No execution proceeding was, however, instituted within the prescribed period of limitation either by Akhil Chandra Ghosh or after his demise, his legal heirs. The execution proceedings were, however, instituted in 1989 after a period of more than 23 years by the legal heirs of Akhil Chandra Ghosh with a prayer for extending the period of limitation under Section 17(2) of the Limitation Act, 1963. The learned executing court refused to extend the period of limitation and consequently rejected the execution proceedings. Aggrieved by such rejection, they filed four review applications which came to be decided by the imp