TAPAN KUMAR CHATTERJEE Vs. KALYANI DEBI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revisional application raises a short point as to whether and how far a court which had granted a decree for specific performance of an agreement for sale of immovable property on payment of the balance consideration within a time specified, can subsequently extend the time for payment of such balance consideration. There is some divergence in the judicial opinion on the point and, as such, it requires very careful consideration.

(2.) The plaintiff/petitioner instituted Title Suit No. 67 of 1979 for specific performance of an agreement for sale of an immovable property against the defendant/opposite party. The suit was dismissed by the learned Subordinate Judge but succeeded on an appeal, being Title Appeal No. 389 of 1982 before the learned Additional District Judge, 3rd Court, Alipore. On March 25,1983, the learned Additional District Judge in decreeing the plaintiff's suit directed the plaintiff to deposit the balance of the consideration money to the extent of Rs. 1,000/- (the total consideration being Rs. 10,000/-) within a month from that date. The decree further incorporated a default clause to the effect: "In the event of the plaintiff's default in depositing the balance of the consideration money within a month from this date, that is, 25-3-1983 the plaintiff's claim for specific performance shall be barred for ever."

(3.) The plaintiff could not deposit the said sum of Rs. 1,000/- within the time so specified and in the meantime the defendant filed an application for review which was registered as Misc. Case No. 3 of 1983. According to the plaintiff, he, being served with the notice of the application for review, came to know of the aforesaid direction for deposit of the balance consideration within a month from the date of the decree and he was neither informed by his lawyer nor had any previous knowledge of such a direction, hence on May 12, 1983, he filed an application for extension of time for depositing the balance consideration.