MOHINDER SINGH Vs. GURDIAL SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE suit for specific performance of the agreement dated 5. 12. 1985 and for possession in respect of the land measuring 8 Kanals in Village Marajwala, Tehsil Nakoder, District Jalandhar was filed by Gurdial Singh. As per terms of the agreement, the land was to be sold to the plaintiff at the rate of Rs. 20,000/- per acre by Mohinder Singh and others. A sum of Rs. 13,000/- was paid towards sale consideration at the time of execution of the agreement. The remaining sale consideration was payable on execution and registration of the sale-dead. The sale-dead was to be executed by 30. 5. 1986. This suit of the plaintiff was decreed by the trial court on 19. 1. 1991. The Court had directed the decree-holder plaintiff to pay the balance sale consideration of Rs. 47,000/- within a period of two months from the date of the decree. The period expired on 20. 3. 1991.

(2.) THE plaintiff had deposited the balance sale consideration in Court and filed an application dated 12. 4. 1991 praying for condonation of delay and consequential extension of time for deposit of the amount directed under the decree of the Court. This application was allowed vide order dated 20. 4. 1991.

(3.) THE basic question that arises for consideration in this revision, therefore, is, whether the court which had passed the decree for specific performance has any power to extend the period for payment of balance sale consideration as indicated in the decree, or not. These cases may be classified in two following classes: (i) Where the Court passing the decree imposes a condition for payment of balance sale consideration within the prescribed period, but decline to impose any condition in the event of default. (ii) Where the court passing the decree imposes a condition that in the event of default of payment of balance sale consideration, the suit shall stand dismissed automatically. Which out of two above classes, the case falls, would primarily be determining factor, whether the court should or should not extent time. It the case falls in the first category, then undoubtedly the court would have power to extend time while in other class of cases, it may not be possible for the court to grant extension of time, for depositing the balance sale consideration in terms of the decree in the face of peremptory condition in the decree.