Back
Decade of Delay Dissolved: Telangana HC Permits Long-Overdue Property Payment
In a ruling blending equity with pragmatism, the
has allowed a to deposit the balance sale consideration—
Rs. 8.1 lakh
—after a staggering
3,358-day delay
(over nine years). Justice
Renuka Yara
set aside a lower court's dismissal, emphasizing that the seller's silence on an unchallenged
decree tips the scales toward relief. As noted in legal reports, this decision underscores that a seller who
"lets the decree attain finality"
cannot later bar execution on delay grounds alone.
Suit to Stalemate: The Property Tug-of-War
The saga began in 2010 with Shaik Abdul Khader (petitioner/) filing O.S. No. 371 before the , seeking of an agreement of sale. On , an was passed in his favor, directing deposit of the balance Rs. 8,10,000 within 15 days. Khader took possession of the suit property but failed to pay.
Fast-forward to 2021: Khader filed E.P. No. 2349 (renumbered E.P. No. 1743 of 2022 ) for execution before the —post-district bifurcation transfer. Alongside came E.A. No. 40 of 2023 (old No. 1844 of 2021) seeking condonation of the massive delay. The execution court dismissed it on , citing lack of jurisdiction and vagueness in delay reasons, prompting this Civil Revision Petition No. 345 of 2025 .
Key questions: Can the execution court condone delay under
? Does administrative transfer override the
"court which passed the decree"
rule? Are personal hardships valid excuses after nearly a decade?
Petitioner's Possession Plea vs. Seller's Stonewalling
Khader's counsel ()
argued compassion: The respondent (
G. Anil Dutt Kamble
) allegedly filed (then lost) a set-aside petition, agreed informally to receive payment but evaded, amid Khader's daughter's marriage and his retirement. Possession—admitted by Kamble—proved mutual understanding. The unchallenged decree made Khader the
"rightful owner sans registered deed."
Offer interest at bank rates to compensate.
Respondent's counsel () fired back: Vague excuses—no petition details, marriage dates, or retirement proof. No readiness to pay ever shown. Delay unconscionable after nine years. Relied on Agnipalli Hanumantha Rao v. Vegi Venkata Lakshmi (2013), mandating applications before the decree-passing court, not execution court, per Section 28 SRA. Also cited Damodaran Pillai v. South Indian Bank Ltd. (2005 SC) against Section 5 in executions.
Navigating Jurisdiction and Equity: Court's Keen Calculus
Justice Yara dissected objections meticulously. doesn't apply to executions, but Section 28 SRA empowers discretion for extensions—wrong provision invocation no bar ( ). Critically, Kamble never contested the suit or appealed, letting the decree finalize over 10 years.
Pivotal pivot: District bifurcation transferred records administratively to Medchal-Malkajgiri; refiling in Ranga Reddy would fail for want of jurisdiction. Distinguishing Agnipalli , this wasn't party error but state action.
Drawing from T.H. Chakrapani v. B.S. Lavanya (Andhra Pradesh HC, 2022), denying deposit would "nullify the decree," defeating 's purpose—especially against a non-contesting seller.
Key Observations from the Bench
"The respondent in his wisdom did not contest the main suit and the same resulted in passing of decree in favour of the petitioner. The respondent did not deem it fit to challenge the decree for a period of atleast 10 years and the judgment and decree has become final."(Para 15)
"If the petition is not allowed... which amounts to nullifying a decree of passed in favour of the petitioner, that too when the respondent not challenged reason mentioned..."(Para 16, quoting T.H. Chakrapani)
"Only on account of the administrative action, the suit has been transmitted... Therefore, the petitioner had no other option..."(Para 18)
Relief with Interest: A Fair Finality
The CRP succeeded on : Impugned order set aside, delay condoned, deposit permitted with 12% p.a. interest from decree date. No costs.
This equips decree-holders in similar binds, prioritizing finality over hyper-technicalities, compensating via interest. Future executions may lean toward leniency where sellers slumber, but demands robust proof amid delays. A win for possession-backed equity in Telangana's civil courts.
