JUDGMENT- S.D. GUNDEWAR, J.:---This civil revision application is heard finally at the stage of admission with the consent of both the parties.

2.By the present civil revision application, the applicant has challenged the common order dated 6-11-1999 passed by the learned 5th Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Nagpur in Special Darkhast No. 261/98, whereby the learned trial Judge rejected the objections raised by the applicant and respondent No. 5 in said application.

3.A few facts leading to this application are as under :---

The respondents Nos. 1 to 3/original plaintiffs had filed Special Civil Suit No. 733/88 for specific performance of agreement of sale dated 19-6-1986 against the legal representatives of the deceased Narayanrao Akolikar, i.e. applicant and non-applicants Nos. 4 to 11 in respect of Municipal House No. 959/0+3 situated in Ward No. 75, Nagpur, alleging that on 19-6-1986 the deceased Narayanrao Akolikar agreed to sell the said house to them for a consideration of Rs. 5,40,000/-. It was also alleged that the amount of Rs. 50,000/- was paid by way of an earnest money. The said suit was decreed on 30-3-1998 and the learned 5th Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Nagpur directed the original plaintiffs to deposit the balance amount of consideration of Rupees Three Lakhs in the Court within 30 days from 30-3-1998 and submit a draft for the purpose of sale of the suit property. The sale-deed was to be executed by the defendants within 15 days thereafter.

4.After the aforesaid decree was passed, the plaintiffs had deposited Rupees One Lakh in the Court on 30-4-1998 and Rupees Two Lakhs on 8-6-1998. Before that on 30-4-1998 itself they had filed an application under section 148 of C.P. Code for enlargement of time. After the plaintiffs had deposited the aforesaid balance amount of consideration, they had filed Special Darkhast No. 261/98 for the execution of the decree in question. In the said Special Darkhast, the applicant and the respondent No. 5 had filed their objections to the effect that the said execution proceedings were not maintainable as the entire balance amount of consideration was not paid by the plaintiffs within the time fixed by the Court. According to them, the entire balance amount of Rupees Three Lakhs was to be paid by the plaintiffs upto 30-4-1998. However, they deposited only Rupees One Lakh on 30-4-1998 and the balance amount of Rupees Two Lakhs on 8-6-1998. It was also contended by them that on 30-4-1998 itself the plaintiffs had filed an application under section 148 of Code of Civil Procedure for enlargement of time and as the said application was pending, the execution proceedings were not maintainable. It was further contended by them that soon after the decree was drawn, the Court had become functus officio and it had no jurisdiction to enlarge the time.

5.As against this, it was submitted on behalf of the decree-holders/original plaintiffs that they had deposited the entire amount of consideration in the Court. It was also submitted on behalf of the decree-holders that the amount of Rupees One Lakh was deposited on 30-4-1998 and the remaining amount of Rupees Two Lakhs was deposited on 8-6-1998 and as the Court had accepted the said payment, it indicates that the Court had enlarged the time and, therefore, the decree is executable.

6.The learned 5th Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Nagpur on the basis of the material placed before him and on the analysis thereof, held that as the huge amount had been deposited by the decree-holders within the stipulated time and the remaining amount was also deposited by them which was accepted by the Court, which indicates that the Court had enlarged the time and, therefore, the decree in question is executable. The learned trial Judge has accordingly rejected the objections raised by judgment debtor Nos. 3 5, i.e. the applicant and respondent No. 5 in this revision application. The name of the respondent No. 5 appears to have been subsequently de

Click Here to Read the rest of this document