Allahabad High Court Upholds Execution by Power of Attorney Holder in Landmark Decision

Court clarifies the application of Order XXI Rules 10 and 11(2) of CPC, enabling execution applications signed by persons acquainted with case facts.

The Allahabad High Court, in a significant judgment dated October 17, 2025, ruled that execution applications under the Civil Procedure Code (CPC) can be signed and verified not only by the decree-holder but also by another person proven to be familiar with the case facts. This decision came in the matter of Smt. Santosh Jain and others versus Kewal Kishore and others, marking a pivotal interpretation of Order XXI Rules 10 and 11(2) of the CPC.

The case revolved around the execution of a decree concerning arrears of rent and ejectment, initially decreed in 1993, and confirmed by the Supreme Court in 2000. The decree-holder, Kewal Kishore, had given his father, Gurudas Mal, a Power of Attorney in 1981, allowing him to handle the legal proceedings. The question arose when the execution application was filed by Gurudas Mal, rather than the decree-holder himself.

The petitioners, legal heirs of the original judgment-debtor, contended that the execution application should have been signed by the decree-holder as per Rule 10 of Order XXI. They argued that the Power of Attorney did not extend to execution proceedings. However, the court noted that Rule 11(2) allows for an application to be signed by "some other person" if they are proven to be acquainted with the facts of the case and if the court is satisfied.

Justice Rohit Ranjan Agarwal, adjudicating the case, emphasized that Rules 10 and 11(2) are complementary. He clarified that the execution application’s signing and verification by a Power of Attorney holder, familiar with the case and acting to the court's satisfaction, is valid. This interpretation aims to prevent unnecessary delays and technical objections that could hinder execution proceedings.

Furthermore, the court directed that execution proceedings, often delayed, should be completed within six months as per the guidelines from the Supreme Court’s decision in Rahul S. Shah v. Jindendra Kumar Gandhi. The directive underscores the judiciary's commitment to expedite such proceedings, aligning with the Supreme Court's mandate for efficiency in execution cases.

This judgment not only clarifies the procedural aspects of execution applications but also reinforces the judiciary's stance against technicalities that obstruct justice. It sets a precedent for future cases where the role of a Power of Attorney in execution proceedings might be contested.

Bottom Line:

Execution proceedings - Application for execution under Order XXI Rule 10 and Rule 11(2) CPC can be signed and verified by the decree-holder or by some other person proved to the satisfaction of the Court to be acquainted with the facts of the case.

Statutory provision(s):  

• - Civil Procedure Code, 1908 - Order XXI Rule 10
• - Civil Procedure Code, 1908 - Order XXI Rule 11(2)
• - Civil Procedure Code, 1908 - Order VI Rule 15

Smt. Santosh Jain v. Kewal Kishore, (Allahabad) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2796116