An application for execution of one decree would also be an application for execution of another if one decree merges into another.

ORDER:- Two orders of the Civil Judge Junior Division, Panaji bearing dates 29-11-1975 and 5-12-1975 are challenged in these two Revision Applications. The two orders relate to the same transaction. The facts involved and the law applicable is common in both the applications. The two applications shall therefore be disposed of by the common judgment.

2. The respondent herein is the decree-holder and the applicant the judgment debtor. The decree passed was for delivery of vacant possession of a room.

The decree-holder applied for execution and produced along with the application the certified copy of the decree of the lower court and a certified copy of the judgment dated 15-11-1975 of this Court in affirmance of the decree and order of the trial Court. The warrant of eviction was issued on 5-12-1975 directing the Bailiff to break the lock of the suit room if necessary and give the possession of the suit premises to the decree-holder on 23-12-1975. However, the decree was executed on 5-12-1975 and 6-l2-l975.

3. The judgment-debtor now challenges the execution on various grounds. The first one is that the warrant of eviction directs the Bailiff to execute the decree on 23-12-1975, but the decree was executed by the Bailiff on 5-12-l975. It appears that there was an error due to overnight when it was written in the order that the decree should be executed on a particular day and not on or before that day. Ordinarily, when warrants of eviction are issued, a direction is given to the Bailiff to give the possession to the decree-holder within a certain period of time which is limited by the date fixed in the warrant of eviction. Such warrants normally state that the warrant is returnable on so and so date meaning thereby that the Bailiff should execute the warrant on or after the date of issuance but before the return. It is evident from the warrant issued by the trial Court in this case that the words, "or before" were omitted due to oversight. The decree of the lower Court was confirmed in this Court on 15-11-1975 and there is no reason why the learned trial Judge should not permit the execution of the decree for 18 days after the execution was applied for and granted on December 5, 1975. 1 do not therefore think that this execution should be set aside in this revision proceeding merely because it was executed in the manner in which I have explained. The judgment-debtor has given no other reason why an execution applied for in December 5, and granted on the same day should be stayed over by the Court for 18 days.

4. The next contention raised by Shri Usgaocar merits a more detailed consideration. It is argued by him that the judgment of the trial Court has merged into the judgment of affirmance given by this Court and that therefore the decree to be executed is the decree in appeal passed by this Court and not the decree of the lower Court. Shri Usgaocar states that even if the execution of the decree of the lower Court could be applied for as it was in fact applied for, it was incumbent upon the decree-holder to cause the issuance of a notice by the executing Court on the judgment-debtor, in view of the provisions of O. 21, R. 22, C. P. C., as one year had lapsed between the date of the decree and the date of the application for its execution. It is difficult for me to accept such a proposition of law. If one decree merges into another, an application for execution of one would also be an application for execution of the other. Besides, in the present case, the decree-holder annexed a copy of the judgment of the appellate court and stated in his application for execution that the judgment of the lower court was confirmed by the judgment of the appellate court. In the firm of Fakirbhai Karsanji v. Gulabbhai Khandubhai Desai, AIR 1964 Guj 277 the contention raised by the judgment-debtor that the decree of the trial court was not executable, was rejected by the High Court as being a contention without substance. In that case t