MP High Court: an Executing Court cannot change the area of land fixed by the decree it is executing

A civil court had decreed specific performance of an agreement to sell land described as Survey No. 79/1, measuring 0.80 hectare. At the execution stage, the judgment-debtor objected that revenue records actually showed the same survey number as only 0.08 hectare, and sought dismissal of the execution on that ground.

Deciding the resulting civil revision on 12 October 2026, Justice Deepak Khot held that under Section 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure, an Executing Court's jurisdiction is confined to giving effect to the decree exactly as it stands; it cannot vary, reduce or 'correct' the area or any other term of the decree, however the revenue record reads, unless the decree itself is a nullity for lack of inherent jurisdiction in the court that passed it. Relying on the Supreme Court's reasoning in Maurice W. Innis v. Lily Kazrooni and the settled line of authority in Vasudev Dhanjibhai Modi v. Rajabhai Abdul Rehman and Sunder Dass v. Ram Prakash, the Court set aside the trial court's order that had effectively tried to reduce the decreed area at the execution stage, and left the decree-holder free to apply to the civil court that passed the decree for its correction, rather than have the Executing Court do so on its own.