Section 36 of CPC provides that every order of court is to be executed in the same manner as a decree

In a case wherein, the defendant claims to be the second wife of the deceased, she was in possession of the property, the son (from first marriage filed an application directing the defendant to disclose particulars of rent collected by the defendant. The civil court directed the defendant to pay rent. The defendant refused to deposit the amount. The question arose as to how the order was to be executed. Section 36 of CPC provides that every order of the court is to be executed in the same manner as a decree. Order XXI, Rule 15 of CPC provides that in cases involving joint decree holders, it is sufficient if one decree holder applies on behalf of the others. 

Under Order XXI Rule 22 of CPC, if an execution application is filed within two years, no notice is required to be served upon the judgment debtor. However, in the case of legal representatives, service of notice is mandatory notwithstanding the fact that the application was filed within two years. There can be no doubt that all orders passed by the Court arc executable just like decrees in so far as it may be practicable. It was for that reason that a Division Bench of the Patna High Court in Ramkeshwar Prasad v. Girja Prasad; AIR 1957 Pat. 501. took the view that any order passed by the Court directing payment of Commissioner's fee would be executable as an order by virtue of Section 36 of CPC. Their Lordships have discussed the question in all its aspects, particularly with reference to the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, as also the earlier Civil Procedure Code of the year 1882. The observations of their Lordships in paragraph 5 may usefully be reproduced as follows: " 

In Bhudev Mallick vs. Ranajit Ghoshal reported in 2025 SC OnLine SC 360 (paras 53, 55 and 59), the Supreme Court referred to provisions of Section 36 of the CPC relating to execution of decrees which are also applicable to execution of orders.