VIDYA SAGAR RAI Vs. RAM LAGAN THAKUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS application in revision is directed against the order dated 31. 1. 1994 passed in Title Suit No. 25 ot 1992 whereby the court refused to extend the time for deposit of the balance of the consideration money.

(2.) THE relevant facts of the case are that the petitioner filed the above mentioned suit tor specific performance of contract the suit was decreed on 27. 8. 1993 with and specific direction to deposit the balance of the consideration money within a period of one month failing which the suit would stand dismissed. The petitioner filed an application for certified copy of the judgment on 28. 9. 1993. The same was ready orn 17. 12. 1993 and on the same day it was handed over to the petitioner. Or 18. 12. 1993 the petitioner filed an applicatiorr tor extension of time stating therein that he had no knowledge with regard to payment of the balance of the consideration money within a month and he knew about the aforesaid condition after obtaining the certified copy of the judgment on 17. 12. 1993. The court by the impugned order dismissed the said petition for extension of time for deposit of the balance of the consideration money on the ground that the court has become functus officio.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner submitted that rejection of the petition on the ground that the court has become functus officio is erroneous in law. Learned counsel for the opposite party however, contended that the decree was conditional. On failure to deposit the balance of the consideration money, the suit was to be dismissed and hence the court is justified in rejecting the petition of the petitioner for extension of time.