http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 1  

PETITIONER: MD. ALIMUDDIN

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: WAIZUDDIN & ANR.

DATE OF JUDGMENT:       02/02/1997

BENCH: K. RAMASWAMY, S. SAGHIR AHMAD

ACT:

HEADNOTE:

JUDGMENT:                          O R D E R      The petitioner   is  the judgment-debtor.  A decree for specific performance was granted by the Trial Court way back in June  15, 1982  in  Title  Suit  No.  46/1976  which  way reversed by  the Appellant  Court but  restored by  the High Court. Special  Leave Petition  was dismissed by this Court. Consequently, the    decree  for  specific  performance  has become final.  It would appear that Trial Court directed the respondents to deposit the balance consideration of Rs.500/- and  draft   sale  deed  on  or  before  June  7,  1982.  An application for  extension with the challen came to be filed and the  same was  ordered by  the Court on August 20, 1982. The petitioner  filed an application under Sec.28 (1) of the Specific Relief Act to rescind the contract. The Trial Court dismissed the  petition. On  appeal it was confirmed. In the revision also, the High Court confirmed the same. Thus, this Special Leave Petition.      It is  true that,  as pointed  out by  Shri Sinha,  the learned counsel  for the  petitioner that  the  Trial  Court while extending the time mentioned that it is at the risk of the  plaintiff  but  having  exercised  the  discretion  and allowed the respondents to deposit the balance consideration of Rs.  500/- it  amounts to that the Court has extended the time. The  respondents in  the decree  of July  7, 1982. The Courts  below,   therefore,  have   rightly  exercised   the discretion in  extending the  time for compliance. We do not find any illegality in the exercise of the power. The SLP is accordingly dismissed.