The Supreme Court of India, while accepting an unconditional apology from the Registrar General of the High Court of Karnataka for a delay in submitting data, has flagged the “alarming” pendency of 1,41,814 execution petitions within the state’s district judiciary and directed the High Court to evolve a procedure for their expeditious disposal.
A bench comprising Justice J.B. Pardiwala and Justice Pankaj Mithal issued the order on November 11, 2025, in Miscellaneous Application Nos. 1889-1891 of 2025. The matter arose from the court’s ongoing monitoring of the disposal of execution petitions nationwide, following its main judgment in Civil Appeal Nos. 3640-3642 of 2025, dated March 6, 2025.
Background of the Matter
In a previous order dated October 16, 2025, the Supreme Court had noted that while 3,38,685 execution petitions had been disposed of nationally in the preceding six months, the High Court of Karnataka had “failed to furnish” the necessary data. The apex court had directed the Registry to issue a reminder and sought an explanation from the Registrar General of the High Court of Karnataka for the failure.
Registrar General’s Explanation
In compliance with the court’s direction, the Registrar General filed an affidavit offering an explanation and tendering an “unconditional apology.”
The affidavit detailed the reasons for the delay, stating that it “was purely inadvertent and not intentional.” The Registrar General submitted that after the High Court issued a circular to collect the data, delays occurred because several districts, including Dharwad, were late in submitting their reports.
Furthermore, the affidavit stated that “some of the data initially received from few districts was found to be inaccurate,” which necessitated a “further request from this office for the corrected information.”
The Registrar General also informed the court that the Supreme Court Registry, via a communication on October 10, 2025, required the information to be “furnished in an updated format.” This “made it necessary to once again collect and collate data from the concerned districts.” Delays in receiving this reformatted data from several districts, compounded by general holidays on October 11 and 12, 2025, led to the delay in filing the compliance report.
“I, sincerely regret the lapse on the part of the Registry in obtaining the information from the District Judiciary and filing the compliance report within the stipulated time,” the Registrar General stated, assuring the court that “henceforth, every effort shall be made to diligent and strict compliance.”
Court’s Analysis and ‘Alarming’ Findings
The Supreme Court bench, in its order, stated: “The explanation offered by the Registrar General, High Court of Karnataka is accepted.”
However, the court proceeded to analyze the data submitted, describing the pendency figures as “alarming.” The statement provided showed that as of February 28, 2025, the total closing balance of pending execution cases in Karnataka’s district judiciary was 1,57,217.
The court further noted that as of March 6, 2025, the date of its main judgment, 1,51,278 execution petitions were pending. While 41,221 petitions were disposed of in the subsequent six months, the court found that “As on date, 1,41,814 execution petitions are pending in the district judiciary in the State of Karnataka.”
Reiterating its concern, the bench observed, “1,41,814 is a very alarming pendency.”
Directions Issued by the Supreme Court
Based on these findings, the Supreme Court issued several directions:
- Serious Attention Required: “We expect the High Court of Karnataka to take up the issue of huge pendency of the execution petitions in the different courts of its district judiciary very seriously.”
- Evolve New Procedure: “We request the High Court of Karnataka to evolve some procedure and guide the district judiciary for effective and expeditious disposal of the execution petitions pending as on date.”
- On Withdrawal and Refiling of Petitions: The court added a significant directive aimed at preventing procedural misuse. “The executing court should ensure that without any valid reason, it should not permit the learned advocates to withdraw the execution petitions and then refile them again,” the bench ordered. “It is only for a very valid reason that the executing court may permit withdrawal of the execution petition already filed with permission to file a fresh petition.”
- Inform the Chief Justice: The court directed that one copy of its order be forwarded “at the earliest” to the Registrar General, who “in turn, shall place it before the Hon’ble Chief Justice of the High Court of Karnataka.”
The Miscellaneous Applications are scheduled to be listed again on April 10, 2026, for reporting further compliance with the court’s directions.
