LAWS(P&H)-2014-8-289

ASHOK KUMAR Vs. SATNAM SINGH AND ORS.

Decided On August 16, 2014
ASHOK KUMAR Appellant
V/S
Satnam Singh And Ors. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiff is in revision against the order of the Appellate Court declining his application for extension of time to deposit the balance sale consideration in terms of the judgment and decree dated 03.05.2013.

(2.) The facts as narrated before me are that the plaintiff filed a suit for possession by way of specific performance of the agreement to sell, which was partly decreed by the trial Court directing the return of earnest money with interest. The plaintiff, however, assailed that decree by way of appeal and was successful in getting his primary prayer of execution of the contract by registration of the sale deed. Such kind of decree is passed under Order 21 Rule 12-A of the Code of Civil Procedure, which provides that at the time of decreeing the suit for specific performance, the Court must give specific time for the purpose of deposit of the decreetal amount. In this case, the Court had also given two months time to the plaintiff to deposit the decreetal amount which was to expire on 03.07.2013.

(3.) Admittedly, the plaintiff had deposited the decreetal amount on 11.07.2013, which was beyond the stipulated date of 03.07.2013 and, therefore, his prayer for extension of time has been declined by the lower Appellate Court.