The decree-holder did not make the deposit within the time stipulated by the Court nor the deposit of the balance consideration .Trial Court alone has power to extend the time to satisfy the conditional decree.

Citation

CDJ 2015 SC 287

P.R.Yelumalai and others vs N.M.Ravi and others

Head note

Specific Relief Act - Section 28(1) - The decree-holder did not make the deposit within the time stipulated by the Court nor the deposit of the balance consideration was made through the mode as stipulated by the Court, and that being the case, the suit will have to be deemed as dismissed. Trial Court alone has power to extend the time to satisfy the conditional decree. Application for extension of stay filed after 3 weeks of time. Finding that there is no evidence to show that the plaintiff had made any effort to deposit the amount on the fixed day. The application was dismissed on its merits and not merely on the technical grounds. The Plaintiff-Buyer has clearly defaulted on time of depositing as well as the mode of payment. The decree was self-operative and the suit stood dismissed for non-compliance of the decree.

Cases Referred:
Md. Alimuddin v. Waizuddin and Anr., (1998) 9 SCC 108
Johri Singh v. Sukh Pal Singh and Ors., (1989) 4 SCC 403

Comparative Citations:
2015 (2) CTC 559, 2015 (3) MLJ 321, 2015 (4) SCJ 203, 2015 (4) LW 90, 2015 (4) KCCR 3073, 2015 (4) AD(SC) 601, 2015 AIR(SCW) 2405, 2015 (2) AIR(Kar) R 632, 2015 (4) ALD 1, 2015 (110) ALLLR 503, 2015 (3) AWC 2686, 2015 (3) BCR 319, 2015 (3) JT 382, 2015 (1) OLR 1051, 2015 (3) Pat LJR 99, 2015 (180) PunLR 487, 2015 (2) RCR(Civil) 585, 2015 (128) RD 403, 2015 (4) Scale 322, 2015 (9) SCC 52, 2015 (2) WLN 6, 2016 (115) ALLLR 380, 2015 (2) CDR 526, 2015 (2) JLJR 535, 2016 (2) MAH.L.J 483, 2015 (128) RD 403, 2015 (4) CCC 352,