LAKSHMI K Vs. M ANASUYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner herein was the original defendant and the respondent herein was the plaintiff. The plaintiff-respondent herein instituted the suit O. S. No. 1080 of 1981 in the Court of the II Addl. Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad. The suit was filed by the plaintiff for specific performance of agreement of sale dated 24-2-1980. The agreement of sale was executed by the defendant- petitioner herein in favour of the plaintiff-respondent herein for a consideration of Rs. 36,000/-. The suit was decreed on 27-2-1986 directing the plaintiff-respondent herein to deposit the balance of sale consideration of Rs. 30,000/- within one month from the date of the decree ie., on or before 27-3-1986 and the defendant-petitioner herein was directed to execute the sale deed within two months from the date of decree.

(2.) It is further alleged by the defendant-petitioner herein that the plaintiff- respondent herein did not deposit the amount of Rs. 30,000.00 within one month from the date of decree but filed an application i.e., I. A. No. 429 of 1986 on 24-3-1986 seeking extension of time till 27-4-1986. The said application was allowed extending the time for depositing the amount of Rs. 30,000.00 till 2-6-1986.

(3.) It is further alleged by the defendant-petitioner herein that the plaintiff- respondent herein failed to deposit the aforesaid amount on or before 2-6-1986; instead the plaintiff-respondent herein filed another application i.e., I. A.No. 3245 of 1987 on 9-9-1987 seeking further extension of time and she seems to have deposited an amount of Rs. 30,000.00 on 15-2-1989 ie., three years after the date fixed by the decree. The Accounts Section of the trial Court seems to have put up a note to the effect that the deposit had been made on 13-3-1989 and the same was withdrawn by the defendant-petitioner herein. Thereupon, the plaintiff-respondent herein made a false representation before the trial Court that the defendant-petitioner herein had withdrawn the amount deposited by her and thus a false statement was made by the plaintiff- respondent herein to mislead the trial Court. The trial Court passed an order on 8-12-1989 stating that the plaintiff-respondent herein deposited the amount of Rs. 30,000.00 on 13-3-1989 and the defendant-petitioner herein had withdrawn the same. Therefore, I. A. No. 3245 of 1987 filed by the plaintiff- respondent herein was allowed and the time was extended.