In a significant ruling that turned on a rather unusual procedural lapse, the Supreme Court set aside the orders of both the executing court and the Bombay High Court, restoring the original trial court decree in a land dispute case. The bench noted that the first appellate judgment had been passed in favour of appellants who were already dead, making it legally unenforceable.
Background
The dispute traces back to agricultural land in Wardha district, which had originally been allotted to an ex-serviceman, Arjunrao Thakre. After his death, the land was re-allotted to others by the local administration. His legal heirs challenged this re-allotment, and in 2006, the trial court declared the heirs as lawful owners and granted them possession of the land.
However, some of the respondents (defendant numbers 4 and 5) filed an appeal. What went unnoticed at the time was that both of them died during the pendency of that appeal, and no legal heirs were substituted. Despite this, the appellate court partly modified the trial court decree in 2010.
Years later, when the original heirs sought to execute the trial court decree, the executing court refused, saying that the appellate judgment-though flawed-still prevailed. The High Court agreed with the executing court.
Court’s Observations
The Supreme Court held that the appellate decree was fundamentally invalid because the appeal was decided in favour of parties who were no longer alive, and whose legal heirs were never brought on record. Therefore, the appellate decree was a nullity.
The bench observed, “When the appeal was decided, both the appellants had already expired. The adjudication in favour of deceased persons cannot have the force of law.” It added that such a decree can be challenged even at the stage of execution.
The Court clarified that the argument of the appeal not having technically “abated” within ninety days of death did not save the decree, because the critical issue was that the case was heard and decided after both appellants had already died.
Decision
The Supreme Court therefore set aside the High Court’s and executing court’s orders. It restored the execution proceedings and held that only the trial court’s 2006 decree stands, and must now be carried out.
The matter now returns to the executing court, which must enforce the original decree in favour of the legal heirs of the ex-serviceman.
Case: Vikram Bhalchandra Ghongade vs State of Maharashtra & Others
Case Number: Civil Appeal (Arising out of SLP (Civil) No. 9947 of 2024)
Court: Supreme Court of India
Bench: Hon’ble Justice Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha & Hon’ble Justice Atul S. Chandurkar
Date of Judgment: 06 November 2025