I was sitting in my office, sipping a hot cup of coffee, when an article caught my attention. It spoke about something truly staggering — the pendency of over 8.82 lakh execution petitions across the country, a situation the Hon’ble Supreme Court recently described as “highly disappointing” and “alarming.” Those words stayed with me.
Now, you might be wondering — what exactly is an Execution Petition? In simple terms, it’s a plea filed by a decree holder (the person who won a civil case) asking the court to enforce its own judgment. In other words, it’s the process of actually getting what the court has already said you rightfully deserve.
Most people believe that once the court passes a decree, the decree holder can immediately claim their property or enforce their rights. But hold on — it’s not that straightforward. The journey doesn’t end with the court’s decision; in fact, it enters a new phase called the “Execution Stage.” This is where the real struggle begins — the fight to turn a judgment on a piece of paper into real justice.
As I was still thinking about this grim reality, my office door opened. In walked a client, carrying a stack of documents — old files, tied neatly together — all related to a land dispute, a civil case. After exchanging greetings, we began discussing the case. We went through the papers, the facts, the remedies available, and the chances of success. It looked challenging, yes, but not impossible. I felt he had a solid chance of winning.
I explained everything in detail — the legal aspects, the procedure, and what he could expect. He seemed satisfied, confident even, and decided to hand over the case to me. But just as he was about to leave, he stopped, turned around, and asked a question that hit me harder than I expected:
“Sir, how long will it take to complete the case?”
That simple question has stayed with me ever since. Every time I stand before a court, it echoes in my mind — how long will it take?
“If the execution petitions remain pending for three or four years, it defeats the very purpose of the decree.”
— Hon’ble Justice Pardiwala
And that’s the bitter truth — a truth that reminds us that justice delayed doesn’t just test patience; it quietly erodes faith in the very system meant to protect it.
Digging Deeper — Who is Responsible?
The client’s question — “How long will it take?” — kept echoing in my mind long after he left. It pushed me to think deeper, to take a hard look at the machinery of our justice system and examine every nut and bolt that makes it run — or, more often, crawl.
For obvious reasons, my thoughts turned first to the Civil Procedure Code (CPC), the backbone of our civil justice process. Could it be the main culprit behind these endless delays? At first glance, it seemed like a logical suspect. But as I dug deeper, reading through past reforms and landmark Supreme Court rulings — from the Salem Bar Association case, which set clear timelines for civil suits, to the more recent Periyammal vs. Rajamani decision, which laid down deadlines for execution petitions — one thing became clear: the CPC has evolved. The laws are there, the directions are in place, yet the ground reality remains painfully unchanged.
Civil litigation in India still moves at a pace that tests human patience — sometimes stretching not just over years but entire decades. So, if not the CPC, then who or what is to blame?
A System Struggling Under Its Own Weight
The next obvious stop in my line of thought was the judiciary — the torchbearer of justice, the very institution that keeps the system alive. But here too, the truth is far from simple.
Our judiciary today is struggling under its own weight. Judges are burdened with every kind of case imaginable — civil, criminal, family, revenue, and consumer disputes. With such a massive workload, their time and attention get divided across too many fronts. Civil cases, with their thick bundles of evidence and intricate legal issues, often get pushed down the priority list. What should have been a smooth, continuous process turns into a drawn-out marathon, scattered over months and, too often, years.
Advocates and the Art of Delay
As my reflections deepened, another uncomfortable truth surfaced — the role of lawyers themselves. Yes, we, the members of the Bar, are part of this loop too.
Over the years, I’ve seen how the clever use of procedure can quietly turn into a weapon of delay. Endless interim applications, repetitive objections, and adjournments — all well within the law — are often used to stretch proceedings a little further. What begins as a legitimate legal right sometimes becomes a strategy to buy time.
Now, I don’t say this to point fingers. The profession is demanding, and every lawyer fights hard for their client. But when the system rewards delay — when every procedural twist becomes an opportunity to push a hearing to “the next date” — justice takes a backseat. The law, meant to ensure fairness, ends up being used to postpone it.
In this slow grind, the real victim is the litigant — the ordinary person who walks into court with hope and trust, believing that the system will protect their rights. For them, every adjournment is not just another date — it’s another month of waiting, another year of uncertainty, another reminder that justice, in practice, is often painfully out of reach.
After the Judiciary, the Bar… Came the Law Itself
After my thought process on the CPC, the Judiciary, and the Advocates, it came to my realisation that the entire system is caught in a complex, almost endless loop. Civil litigation, especially in property and land disputes, seems to go round in circles — from revenue courts to the Supreme Court and back, from civil courts to the Supreme Court and again down to the trial court. Even when a decree is finally passed, the execution proceedings start a new chapter of litigation, sometimes lasting just as long as the original case.
And then, there’s the law itself. The Civil Procedure Code, though framed with the intent of ensuring fairness and order, is intricately woven with a maze of other statutes — the Land Revenue Code, the Specific Relief Act, the Limitation Act, the Indian Succession Act, the Hindu Succession Act, Muslim Personal Law, the Indian Contract Act, and countless local laws. Each brings its own layers of procedure and interpretation.
Adding to this complexity are conflicting judgments and overlapping provisions, which only deepen the confusion. What was meant to ensure justice and clarity often ends up creating space for endless interpretation — and with it, endless delay.
The Way Forward – A Ray of Hope
Yet, despite this complexity and delay, I see a ray of hope. The legal ecosystem is slowly awakening to the idea that justice delayed is, indeed, justice denied. Digital filing, e-courts, case management systems, and AI-driven tools are beginning to make an impact. The judiciary, too, is showing willingness to adopt structural reforms and emphasize accountability.
But real change won’t come from technology alone — it must also come from mindset. Advocates must embrace their role not only as representatives of clients but also as officers of justice. Judges must balance empathy with efficiency. Lawmakers must prioritize simplification over expansion.
The Civil Procedure Code was built to ensure fairness. Now, the time has come to make it functional as well.
When the system begins to move — not mechanically, but with purpose and compassion — the circle can finally become a straight path leading to justice.
A Thought to Leave You With
That client’s question — “How long will it take?” — wasn’t just about his land or his case. It was about the faith of millions who walk into courts each day, hoping for justice in their lifetime.
“Justice delayed isn’t just justice denied — it’s hope denied, trust shaken, and faith tested.”
If we truly want to reform our justice system, we must begin by treating delay itself as a form of injustice. Because justice is not just about who is right — it’s about when the right is restored.
The day we value time as much as truth, that will be the day our justice system truly delivers not just decrees, but dignity.
About the Author:
Advocate Sanjeev Rajput is a Ahmedabad based litigator and writer who reflects on courtroom experiences, legal advocacy, and the evolving practice of law. Through his writing, he aims to bridge the emotional and intellectual journey of litigation.