Execution proceedings cannot continue until the appellate court decides delay-condonation and interim-stay applications.

The respondent, as plaintiff, obtained a decree for delivery of possession against the petitioner in O.S. No. 76/2014 on 4 August 2026.

The petitioner filed a delayed appeal, R.A. No. 30/2026, accompanied by applications to condone the delay and stay the decree.

While those applications were pending, the respondent commenced execution in E.P. No. 86/2026, and the Executing Court ordered a possession warrant.

The petitioner challenged the execution orders before the High Court under Article 227 of the Constitution.

The judgment refers to R.A. No. 60/2026 in paragraph 7, although its other references, including the operative order, identify the appeal as R.A. No. 30/2026.

1. Whether the Executing Court should proceed with execution while the petitioner’s applications to condone the delay in appeal and for interim stay remain undecided.

2. Whether the Appellate Court should be directed to decide those applications within a specified period.

The Court invoked its jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution in a challenge concerning execution proceedings under the Code of Civil Procedure.

It stated that, in the circumstances of this case, it would not be appropriate for the Executing Court to proceed with execution until the Appellate Court had considered the petitioner’s applications for condonation of delay and interim stay.

The judgment cites no specific CPC provision or precedent.

The appeal had been filed belatedly, and the applications seeking condonation of delay and interim stay had not yet been decided.

Because the decree-holder had meanwhile initiated execution and obtained a possession warrant, the Court considered it inappropriate for execution to continue before the Appellate Court ruled on those applications.

It therefore directed the petitioner to pursue the applications without unnecessary adjournments, allowed the respondent to file objections, and set a time limit for the Appellate Court’s decision.

It directed the Appellate Court to decide the applications within 60 days from the respondent’s appearance, permitted the respondent to file objections, and made no order as to costs.