Courts possess discretion under CPC and the Specific Relief Act to extend deadlines for contract performance, reflecting on claimants' willingness and circumstances surrounding payment delays.

JUDGMENT :

MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN, J.

1. This original petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against Ext. P6 order dated 13.04.2018 in I.A. No.1277 of 2018 in O.S. No.11 of 2016 on the files of the Court of the Subordinate Judge (Addl.), Palakkad.

2. The suit was filed by the petitioners herein for specific performance of contract with alternate prayer for return of advance amount. The trial court set the respondents/defendants ex parte and decreed the suit on 11.08.2017 as following:

“1) The plaintiff is directed to deposit balance sale consideration within 3 months from today and give notice thereafter defendants.

2) On receipt of the notice on deposit the defendants shall assign the property to the plaintiff at their expense and also hand over possession to the plaintiffs. Thereupon defendants are entitled to receive balance consideration deposited in the Court after adjusting the cost of the suit allowed to the plaintiffs.

3) If the defendants failed to assign property within 30 days from the date of receipt of notice as stated above. The plaintiffs can apply to the Court for assigning the property and possession thereof through Court.

4) Plaintiffs are entitled to realise the costs of the suit and adjusted in the amount ordered to be deposited.”

3. The copy of the ex parte decree in O.S. No.11 of 2016 is marked as Ext. P1 in the original petition and Ext. P2 is the copy of the judgment. The petitioners could not deposit the balance sale consideration of Rs.23,89,500/- within the time stipulated in the decree. Therefore, they filed I.A. No.3039 of 2017 (Ext. P3) under Sections 148, 149 and 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) for extending the time to deposit the balance sale consideration for a further period of two months. In Ext. P3, it was urged that the petitioners came to know that the balance sale consideration has to be deposited within three months only when they received the copy of the decree and judgment on 21.10.2017 and practically 70 days had been lost during the pendency of the copy application and they got hardly 20 days to deposit the amount which was quite inadequate.

4. The trial court issued notice in Ext. P3 application. Since the service could not be effected as the addressee had left, substituted service was taken by affixture. The respondents were called absent on 09.04.2018. The trial court passed Ext.P4 order which reads as follows:

“Petition filed Under Section 148, 149 & 151 of the CPC.

2. R1 and R2 called absent. This petition is filed for extending 2 months time from 11.11.2017. In fact that time extended by 11.01.2018. Now considering the fact the process was not complete. I find that time can be granted to 3 days from today. Hence, make deposit with in 3 days. Post to 13.04.2018.”

In Ext. P4, the trial court observed that the period sought for in the petition had actually expired on 11.01.2018. However, considering the fact that the process was not complete, 3 days’ more time was granted for depositing the balance sale consideration and the case was posted to 13.04.2018. In the meantime, on 12.04.2018, the petitioners filed I.A. No.1277 of 2018 (Ext. P5) in I.A. No.3039 of 2017 under Sections 148, 149 and 151 of the CPC seeking two weeks’ further time from 12.04.2018 for depositing the amount. In the affidavit accompanying the said application, as sworn to by the counsel appearing for the petitioners, it was stated that despite his best efforts, he could