R MUTHUKRISHNAN Vs. PAPPATHI @ ANGAMMAL; SHANMUGASUNDARAM; MANIKANDAN; THENMOZHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner filed a suit in O.S. No. 140 of 2007, on the file of the District Munsif Court, Oddanchatram, for the relief of specific performance of a sale agreement against the defendants. The suit was decreed as prayed for, directing the defendants to execute the sale deed, with a condition that the petitioner shall deposit the sale consideration within a period of one month from the date of the decree, namely, 14.03.2008. In the affidavit, it is stated that he could not deposit the amount as directed by the court, within the time and hence further time of two months is prayed for. The petition was filed on 22.03.2008, of course, after the time prescribed by the court below.

(2.) The learned Counsel for the petitioner Mr. S. Anand Chandrasekar would submit that it is well-settled principles of law that even after the expiry of time, the time could be extended by the court under Section 148 and 151 of C.P.C and it is specifically provided under Section 148 of Civil Procedure Code that the court has got the power to enlarge the time for compliance on condition or direction by one month. Within one month from the date of the expiry period, the petitioner has filed the application. He placed reliance upon a decision of the Larger Bench of the Supreme Court in Mahanth Ram Das v. Ganga Das, 1961 3 SCR 763 , wherein, the Lordships have held as follows:

(3.) The subsequent judgments of this court with consistent view are also to the effect that the courts are not percluded from enlarging the time for compliance of a particular direction by the court, even after the period sitpulated in the order was over.