8.3 Execution Questions (s.47) & Commissions (s.75)
Key Takeaways
- Section 47: all questions arising between the parties to the suit (or their representatives) and relating to the execution, discharge, or satisfaction of the decree shall be determined by the court executing the decree—not by a separate suit
- s.47 channels execution disputes into execution proceedings to prevent multiplicity; it is not a licence to re-try the original title suit under the label of execution
- Parties and representatives for s.47 include those on whom the interest devolves; auction-purchaser themes appear in explanations/case-taught extensions
- Section 75: court may issue a commission for examination of witnesses, local investigation, examination/adjustment of accounts, partition, ministerial acts, and related purposes listed in the section
- Commissions are auxiliary fact-gathering/performance tools; the court retains decision-making power and must act within the Code/Orders (esp. Order 26 practice)
Execution Questions (s.47) & Commissions (s.75)
Quick Answer: s.47 — questions between parties (or representatives) about execution, discharge, or satisfaction of a decree are decided by the executing court, not by a fresh suit. s.75 — court may issue a commission to examine persons, make local investigation, examine/adjust accounts, make partition, perform ministerial acts, and other listed purposes. Both provisions reduce delay and multiplicity.
Why s.47 and s.75 Appear Together on the Syllabus
LAW-GAT’s official CPC list pairs a post-decree workhorse (s.47) with a trial-and-inquiry tool (s.75). Neither is “substantive damages law.” Both are machinery:
- After decree, how do we resolve fights about carrying out the decree? → s.47
- During proceedings, how can the court gather evidence or perform technical acts it cannot conveniently do in ordinary sittings? → s.75 commissions
Section 47 — Questions to Be Determined by the Court Executing Decree
Statutory core
Section 47 (essence):
All questions arising between the parties to the suit in which the decree was passed, or their representatives, and relating to the execution, discharge or satisfaction of the decree, shall be determined by the Court executing the decree and not by a separate suit.
Where a question arises as to whether any person is or is not the representative of a party, such question shall, for the purposes of this section, be determined by the Court.
Policy
| Goal | How s.47 serves it |
|---|---|
| One continuous proceeding | Execution is a continuation of the suit for satisfaction of rights already adjudicated |
| Avoid multiplicity | No parallel civil suit on the same execution controversy between the same parties |
| Speed and consistency | Executing court knows the decree and the record |
Anatomy of s.47: Three Hooks
Every s.47 problem has three hooks. Miss one and the answer flips.
1. Who? — Parties or their representatives
| Included | Typical meaning |
|---|---|
| Parties to the suit | Those on the record as plaintiff/defendant (including added parties) between whom the decree operates |
| Representatives | Legal representatives of deceased parties; persons on whom the interest of a party devolves; persons claiming under a party in ways the Code treats as representation for execution |
Explanation / teaching extensions often tested:
- For purposes of s.47, a purchaser of property at a sale in execution of a decree is sometimes treated within the representative/party framework of execution disputes as provided in the section’s explanations and related rules—MCQs stress that many auction-sale controversies are fought in execution, not by ignoring s.47.
- A stranger to the decree who asserts an independent title may not be forced into s.47 if the dispute is truly not between parties/representatives relating to execution—classic boundary of the section.
2. What? — Relating to execution, discharge, or satisfaction
| Phrase | Covers themes |
|---|---|
| Execution | Whether decree is executable; against whom; by what mode; identity of property; payment under decree; obstruction by judgment-debtor; adjustment alleged |
| Discharge | Whether the judgment-debtor has been discharged from the decree’s obligations |
| Satisfaction | Whether the decree has been fully or partly satisfied; certified payments/adjustments |
3. Where / how? — Executing court, not separate suit
The executing court determines the question. A separate suit on that question between those parties is barred by the section’s command.
What Falls Under s.47 vs Separate Suit
| Dispute | Usually s.47 (execution) | Usually separate suit / outside s.47 |
|---|---|---|
| Decree already satisfied by payment; DH still executes | Yes — satisfaction/discharge | — |
| JD claims adjustment not certified | Yes — relating to satisfaction | — |
| Whether property attached is the property covered by the decree as between parties | Often yes | — |
| Third party claims independent title to attached property (true stranger claim) | Not purely s.47 party question—other execution remedies/rules (e.g., claim/objection machinery) | May lead to suit under applicable rules if investigation path so provides |
| Fresh cause of action after satisfaction (new tort, new contract) | No | Yes |
| Attempt to re-litigate original title already decided by the decree | No (decree finality / res judicata themes) | Improper collateral attack |
| Whether a person is legal representative for execution | Yes — s.47 itself says court determines representative status for its purposes | — |
Worked scenarios
| Facts | Analysis |
|---|---|
| DH starts execution; JD produces receipts and says decree is satisfied | Question of satisfaction between parties → executing court under s.47, not a new suit by JD for declaration alone as a way to stall without using execution procedure |
| JD dies; dispute who represents the estate in execution | Representative question → executing court under s.47 |
| Neighbour (never a party) says the attached car is his, not JD’s | Classic third-party claim territory—use the Code’s claim/objection path; do not casually call it a pure s.47 “between parties” issue without checking party status |
| After money decree, DH sues again on the same original debt ignoring the decree | Barred by decree finality / merger themes; not a free second innings |
Limits and Traps of s.47
| Trap | Correct approach |
|---|---|
| “Everything after decree is s.47” | Only questions between parties/representatives relating to execution/discharge/satisfaction |
| “s.47 allows reopening merits of the suit” | No—executing court enforces the decree; it does not sit as an appeal against itself |
| “Separate suit is always available for convenience” | No—where s.47 applies, separate suit is not the route |
| “Only District Judge can decide s.47 questions” | The court executing the decree decides—grade depends on which court is executing |
| Confusing s.47 with s.11 res judicata | s.11 bars re-trial of decided matters generally; s.47 allocates forum/procedure for execution controversies |
Powers incidental to determination
While determining s.47 questions, the executing court exercises powers necessary to give effect to the decree within the Code’s execution scheme (attachment, sale, arrest, delivery of property, etc., as applicable). LAW-GAT expects the section 47 principle, not a full catalogue of every execution Order.
Section 75 — Power of Court to Issue Commissions
Statutory core
Section 75 empowers the Court to issue a commission subject to conditions and limitations prescribed:
| Purpose (s.75 list — learn all) | Meaning for exams |
|---|---|
| To examine any person | Witness/evidence on commission when attendance in court is not convenient or possible under the rules |
| To make a local investigation | Commissioner inspects locality/property and reports (boundaries, condition, market features, etc.) |
| To examine or adjust accounts | Complex account-taking referred to a commissioner |
| To make a partition | Commissioner proposes division of property for partition suits |
| To hold a scientific, technical, or expert investigation | Expert examination where the court needs specialized inquiry (as provided) |
| To conduct sale of property subject to speedy and natural decay and of personal property under certain conditions | Perishable property sale via commission machinery |
| To perform any ministerial act | Non-judicial mechanical acts the court may delegate under the section |
(Exact clause wording should be read from the bare act you revise from; the purposes list is the MCQ payload.)
Nature of a commission
| Feature | Content |
|---|---|
| Auxiliary | Commissioner helps the court; does not replace the judge’s adjudicatory function |
| Report | Local investigation/accounts/partition work typically returns a report subject to court scrutiny and objections |
| Evidence | Examination on commission becomes evidence as provided by the Code/Evidence rules |
| Discretion | Issuance is generally discretionary, guided by convenience, expense, ends of justice, and specific Orders |
Link to Orders (awareness, not full Order 26 course)
Detailed procedure for commissions lives largely in Order 26 (and related rules). The body section on the LAW-GAT list is s.75—the power and purposes. If a stem cites “local investigation,” map it to s.75 + commission practice.
When Courts Issue Commissions: Scenario Table
| Litigation need | s.75 purpose |
|---|---|
| Key witness is too ill to attend court | Examine person on commission |
| Dispute over whether a wall encroaches on plaintiff’s land | Local investigation |
| Partnership dissolution with tangled books | Examine/adjust accounts |
| Preliminary decree for partition of a house among co-sharers | Make partition |
| Need chemical analysis / technical measurement under court direction | Scientific/technical/expert investigation |
| Fruit stock attached and rotting | Sale of property subject to speedy/natural decay |
| Purely mechanical step suitable for delegation | Ministerial act |
s.47 vs s.75 (Do Not Confuse)
| s.47 | s.75 | |
|---|---|---|
| Stage | Primarily post-decree execution controversies | Any stage where the court needs commission assistance (commonly trial/inquiry) |
| Question type | Rights/obligations about carrying out the decree between parties | How to collect evidence or perform technical/ministerial tasks |
| Outcome | Determination by executing court; bars separate suit on that question | Commissioner’s report/act assists court; court still decides |
| Multiplicity policy | Channel execution fights into execution | Avoid court paralysis on complex factual tasks |
Integrated Exam Traps
| Stem | Prefer |
|---|---|
| “Whether decree is satisfied between DH and JD” | s.47 executing court |
| “Separate suit to re-decide same execution satisfaction issue between same parties” | Barred by s.47 |
| “Court appoints person to visit disputed fields and report” | Commission for local investigation under s.75 |
| “Accounts of a long partnership referred out” | Commission to examine or adjust accounts |
| “Commissioner passes a final decree as a judge” | Wrong—commission is not a substitute court |
| “s.47 allows appeal on pure facts as of right in every case” | Wrong—s.47 is about determination forum; appealability depends on whether the determination is a decree/order appealable under other provisions |
Memory Card: s.47 & s.75
- s.47 = parties/representatives + execution/discharge/satisfaction → executing court, no separate suit
- Representative status for s.47 decided by that court
- Not a tool to re-open the original merits
- s.75 = commissions for witnesses, local investigation, accounts, partition, expert investigation, perishable sale, ministerial acts
- Commissioner assists; court decides
Key Takeaways
- s.47 is the execution-multiplicity bar and allocation rule
- Always test the three hooks: who, what relation to execution, executing court
- Stranger independent title ≠ automatic s.47 party question
- s.75 lists must be memorized as purpose bullets
- Commissions are procedural aids under the Code, not free-standing courts
Under section 47 CPC, questions arising between the parties to the suit (or their representatives) and relating to the execution, discharge, or satisfaction of the decree shall be determined by:
Which of the following is a purpose for which a court may issue a commission under section 75 CPC?
Decree-holder proceeds in execution. Judgment-debtor alleges that the money decree has already been fully paid and satisfied. The proper primary forum for determining that controversy between them is: