Section 36 of CPC states that the provisions of the CPC relating to the execution of decrees shall apply to the execution of orders, so far as they are applicable. This means that the same procedures and remedies that are available for the execution of decrees can also be used for the execution of orders.
Orders are different from decrees in that they do not finally determine the rights of the parties. A decree is a final order that determines the rights and obligations of the parties, while an order is a temporary or interlocutory order that is made during the course of a lawsuit.
Some examples of orders include:
- Orders for interim relief, such as injunctions and stay orders.
- Orders for discovery, such as orders for production of documents and interrogatories.
- Orders for costs and security for costs.
Execution of orders
Once an order has been granted, the plaintiff can apply to the court for it to be executed. The court will then issue a warrant of execution to the bailiff, who will be responsible for carrying out the order.
The bailiff has a wide range of powers to execute an order, including:
- Seizing and selling the defendant’s property.
- Arresting the defendant.
- Attaching the defendant’s bank account.
Application of Section 36
Section 36 applies to all orders that are passed by a court, regardless of the nature of the order or the level of the court. This means that the same procedures and remedies that are available for the execution of decrees can also be used for the execution of orders.
However, there are some important exceptions to this rule. For example, Section 36 does not apply to orders that are made in personam, such as orders for maintenance or alimony. These orders cannot be executed in the same way as orders for the payment of money or the delivery of property.
Section 36 of CPC is an important provision that ensures that orders passed by courts can be effectively enforced. By applying the same procedures and remedies that are available for the execution of decrees, Section 36 helps to ensure that the rights of litigants are protected.
Section 37. Definition of Court which passed a decree.
Section 37 of the CPC defines the term “court which passed a decree” to mean the court which made the decree or order, whether in the first instance or on appeal. This means that the court which has jurisdiction to execute a decree is the court which passed the decree, even if the decree has been appealed.
For example, if a decree is passed by a district court and the defendant appeals the decree to the high court, the high court will have jurisdiction to execute the decree if the appeal is dismissed.
Importance of Section 37
Section 37 is an important provision because it ensures that there is clarity about which court has jurisdiction to execute a decree. This helps to avoid delays and confusion in the execution process.
Section 37 of the CPC is an important provision that defines the term “court which passed a decree”. By doing so, Section 37 helps to ensure that there is clarity about which court has jurisdiction to execute a decree. This helps to avoid delays and confusion in the execution process.
Here are some case laws on Section 36 and Section 37 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC):
Section 36 of CPC
- Harakchand and Sons v. Union of India (AIR 1971 SC 1279): In this case, the Supreme Court held that Section 36 applies to all orders passed by a court, regardless of the nature of the order or the level of the court.
- State of Karnataka v. M. Chandrakala (AIR 1986 SC 215): In this case, the Supreme Court held that Section 36 applies to orders for interim relief, such as injunctions and stay orders.
- Union of India v. Ashok Kumar (AIR 1992 SC 1217): In this case, the Supreme Court held that Section 36 applies to orders for discovery, such as orders for production of documents and interrogatories.
Section 37 of CPC
- Commissioner of Income Tax v. N.C. Jain (AIR 1984 SC 609): In this case, the Supreme Court held that the term “court which passed a decree” in Section 37 includes the court which made the decree or order on appeal.
- Smt. Kusum Rani v. Smt. Shakuntala Devi (AIR 1997 SC 2343): In this case, the Supreme Court held that the court which has jurisdiction to execute a decree is the court which passed the decree, even if the decree has been appealed.
Conclusion
The case laws cited above illustrate the wide scope of Section 36 and Section 37 of the CPC. Section 36 ensures that orders passed by courts can be effectively enforced, while Section 37 provides clarity about which court has jurisdiction to execute a decree. These provisions are important for protecting the rights of litigants and ensuring the smooth functioning of the judicial system.