The Revision Petitioner in both the revisions is the judgment‑debtor/defendant in O.S.No.18 of 1998 and O.S.No.15 of 1998. The respondents are the respective plaintiff in both the suits.

2. The respondent/plaintiff in both the suits obtained decree in the said suits. After obtaining decree, they filed Execution Petitions respectively in E.P.Nos.13 and 19 of 2005 on the file of the learned Subordinate Judge. Kuzhithurai, under Order 21, Rules 37 and 38 of Code of Civil Procedure to arrest the judgment‑debtor for realisation of the decree amount. The learned executing Court passed an order on 6.9.2005 ordering the arrest of the judgment debtor by 27.9.2005. The impugned order reads as follows:

“Part satisfaction for Rs.15,000 recorded. Arrest by 27.9.2005."

Challenging the order of the executing court, the judgment‑debtor in both the Execution Petitions, has filed the Civil Revision Petitions.

3. The case brings forcibly to mind the dictum of their Lordships of the Privy Council in Court of Wards v. Maharajah Kumar Ramaput, 14 Moo Ind App 605 at p.612 (A), that the woes of an Indian litigant begin only after he has obtained a decree.

4. Learned counsel appearing for th