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

PETITIONER: YESHODA & ANR

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: K. NAGARAJAN

DATE OF JUDGMENT:       25/09/1996

BENCH: K. RAMASWAMY, S.B.MAJMUDAR

ACT:

HEADNOTE:

JUDGMENT:                          O R D E R      This Special  Leave Petition  arises from  the order of the Division  Bench of  the Karnataka  High Court dated June 19, 1996  in  I.A.  No.3  in  RFA  No.225/84.  The  admitted position is  that in  the suit  for specific performance the High Court  has agreed with the suggestion of the respondent to pay  a further  sum of  Rs.1,80,000/-. The High Court has extended three  months’ time from April 21, 1994 for deposit of the  amount. Special  Leave Petition  filed in this Court was dismissed  on September 23. 1994 and within three months thereafter on  January  17,  1995  the  amount  came  to  be deposited, An  application under  Section 28 of the Specific Relief Act  was filed  to rescind  the decree  on the ground that the  respondent had  committed default in compliance of the conditional  decree of  the deposit  of the  amount. The respondent had  filed an  application for extension of time. The application  for rescission  of the decree was dismissed and the  application for extension of time was allowed. Thus this special leave petition      It is  contended by Mr. Mahale, learned counsel for the petitioner, that  after the expiry of the time prescribed by the court,  the petitioner has a right to seek rescission of the decree  for specific performance for non-compliance. The Court, therefore,  has no power to enlarge the time. We find no force  in the contention. Section 148, CPC gives power to the court  to enlarge the time for complying with the orders of the  court from  time to time. Under those circumstances, the court  has correctly  exercised the discretion since the amount came  to be  deposited within  three months  from the date of dismissal of the special leave petition.      The special leave petition is accordingly dismissed.