1. Execution proceedings for an arbitral award were rejected by the trial court under Order XXI Rule 95, Code of Civil Procedure, citing limitation concerns. (Para 1 )
Back
Next 
2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 74951
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Easwaran S., J
Chakkittapara Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. No.F 1675 – Appellant
Versus
Chinnamma Thomas – Respondent
OP(C) NO. 3461 OF 2026|EP NO.67 OF 2026|ARC NO.60 OF 2016
Important Points
Order XXI Rule 95 of the CPC does not apply to the execution of awards regarding property purchased under Rule 84 of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Rules, 1969; such matters are instead governed by the Limitation Act.
Subject
Civil Law - Execution Proceedings
Act Referred
Code of Civil Procedure: O.XXI R.95
Kerala Co-operative Societies Rules, 1969: R.84
Limitation Act: Art.136, Art.134
Kerala Co-operative Societies Rules, 1969: R.84
Limitation Act: Art.136, Art.134
Headnote
(A) Execution Proceedings - Applicability of Order XXI Rule 95 CPC - Execution of awards against properties purchased under Kerala Co-operative Societies Rules - Held that the provisions of Order XXI Rule 95 of the Code of Civil Procedure are not applicable to a purchaser of property under Rule 84 of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Rules, 1969; instead, the relevant Articles of the Limitation Act govern such proceedings. (Para 3)
Issues: Whether the Execution Petition was rightly rejected as being barred under Rule 95 of Order XXI of the Code of Civil Procedure in a case involving property purchased under the Kerala Co-operative Societies Rules.
Issues: Whether the Execution Petition was rightly rejected as being barred under Rule 95 of Order XXI of the Code of Civil Procedure in a case involving property purchased under the Kerala Co-operative Societies Rules.
Legal Category Hierarchy
Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: P.C.Sasidharan
For the Appellants/Petitioners: P.C.Sasidharan
Table of Contents
2. The petitioner contended that the executing court incorrectly applied bar of limitation under Order XXI Rule 95 to proceedings involving cooperative society rule-based property purchases. (Para 2 )
3. The court observed that Article 136 of the Limitation Act, rather than Article 134, governs execution applications for property purchased under the Kerala Co-operative Societies Rules. (Para 3 )
4. Execution of awards for properties purchased under Kerala Co-operative Societies Rules is governed by Article 136 of the Limitation Act, rendering Order XXI Rule 95 inapplicable. (Para 3 )
5. The court set aside the rejection order and restored the execution petition to the trial court's file for proceedings in accordance with law. (Para 4 )
6. Does Order XXI Rule 95 of the Code of Civil Procedure apply to the execution of arbitration awards for properties purchased under the Kerala Co-operative Societies Rules?
No. The court held that the provisions of Order XXI Rule 95 are not applicable to the execution of awards involving property purchases under the Kerala Co-operative Societies Rules. (Para 3 , 4 )
7. Which article of the Limitation Act applies to the execution of awards involving property purchases under the Kerala Co-operative Societies Rules?
The court clarified that Article 136 of the Limitation Act, not Article 134, governs the limitation period for such execution proceedings. (Para 3 )
THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12.11.2026, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
EASWARAN S., J.
---------------------------
O.P.(C).3461 of 2026 ---------------------------------- Dated : 12th November, 2026
JUDGMENT
The petitioner is a decree holder in ARC No.60/2016. For execution of the Award passed in the arbitration proceedings, E.P.67/2026 was filed before the Munsiff Court, Perambra. The Executing Court by Ext.P4 order rejected the Execution Petition on the ground that the Execution Petition is barred under Rule 95 of Order XXI of the Code of Civil Procedure. Hence the Original Petition.
2. Heard Sri.P.C.Sasidharan, the learned counsel for the petitioner.
3. The question as to whether the provisions of Order XXI Rule 95 will apply in a case of a purchaser of a property under Rule 84 of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Rules, 1969 was considered by a Division Bench of this Court in Selma Beevi v. Karunakaran Pillai [1999 KHC 598 (Ker.) ] and it was held that it is Article 136 of the Limitation Act which apply and not Article 134 of the Limitation Act.
4. In view of the law laid down by the Division Bench of this Court, Ext.P4 order cannot be sustained and accordingly the Original Petition is allowed and E.P.67/2026 will stand restored to the files of the Munsiff Court, Perambra. The Munsiff Court is directed to proceed with the execution proceedings in accordance with law.
