9911796707
TMI Blog1985 (12) TMI 364X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... maluddin filed a suit against the non-applicant-defendant for specific performance of a contract, which was decreed on 13-10-1971 to the effect that if non-applicant-defendant Chhotelal deposited ₹ 1,300/- as principal and ₹ 267.50 p. as costs of the litigation in the Court by 12-1-1972, then he shall continue to be the owner of the house. But, if he failed to deposit the aforesaid amount within the stipulated date, then the plaintiff-applicant Kamaluddin shall pay ₹ 200/- to the non-applicant-defendant, who shall then execute a sale deed in favour of the plaintiff, and the plaintiff shall also get the possession of the house. In compliance with the terms of the decree, non-applicant-defendant Chhotelal deposited an amo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and there is no defect in the exercise of the jurisdiction by the Court below and, therefore, this revision petition should be dismissed. Section 148, CPC, which deals with enlargement of time, is being reproduced below: -- 148. Enlargement of time.-- Where any period is fixed or granted by the Court for the doing of any act prescribed or allowed by the Court, the Court may, in its discretion, from time to time, enlarge such period, even though the period originally fixed or granted may have expired. The law on the point has been finally settled by the Supreme Court in the case of Mahanth Ram Das AIR 1961 SC 882. According to Mahanth Ram Das's case (supra) the Courts have undoubted jurisdiction to extend time in cases where ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the case of Budhulal Kasturchand followed the same view as laid down by their Lordships of the Supreme Court. Even if in the initial order the Court may have said that if the costs are not paid before a certain date fixed for it, the suit shall stand dismissed, the Court does not lose seisin of the case after the expiry of such period notwithstanding the default. The contention of Shri Sahastrabuddhe deserves to be rejected on the ground that the duty of the Court of law is to administer justice, sometimes loosening the rigors of the procedural law. It is the substantive justice which should be administered and not the procedural justice. Procedure is meant to facilitate the way for the administration of real justice and not to defeat it ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
