LAWS(APH)-2016-6-15

SESHA SAI TOWNSHIP PVT LIMITED Vs. TUMMALA AMITHA

Decided On June 01, 2016
Sesha Sai Township Pvt Limited Appellant
V/S
Tummala Amitha Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The unsuccessful defendants had preferred this revision under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 assailing the order dated 07.07.2015 of the learned Senior Civil Judge at Avanigadda of Krishna District passed in I.A.no.7 of 2015 in O.S.no.100 of 2012 filed under Sections 148 and 151 of the Code.

(2.) I have heard the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties. I have perused the material record. The parties shall hereinafter be referred to as the petitioners/defendants and respondent/plaintiff for convenience and clarity.

(3.) The introductory facts, in brief, are as follows: The plaintiff brought the suit against the defendants for recovery of a sum of Rs.7,10,500/ - with interest and costs basing on a cheque dated 15.03.2012 issued by the 2nd defendant in favour of the plaintiff. PW1 in her cross -examination had admitted that she is ready to receive a sum of Rs.5,00,000/ - towards full satisfaction of the suit amount if it is paid within three months from the date of her cross -examination and that in case, the defendants fail to pay the same within the said period, she will proceed with the execution of the decree for the suit amount with costs. Taking into consideration the said evidence, the trial Court had decreed the suit in favour of the plaintiff for a sum of Rs.5,00,000/ - payable by the defendants within three months from 22.09.2014, subject, however, to a further term that on failure of the defendants to pay the said amount within the said three months, the plaintiff would be at liberty to execute the decree for the suit amount of Rs.6,15,760/ - and recover the same with interest and costs. The defendants did not pay the amount of Rs.5,00,000/ - within the time stipulated in the decree of the trial Court. Therefore, they had filed the petition for extension of time. The said petition was resisted by the plaintiff. On merits, by the order impugned, the trial Court had dismissed the petition of the defendants. Therefore, the defendants are before this court.