The petitioner admittedly complied with the provisions of Order XXI. rule 89 in making a deposit to have a sale set aside, except for the fact that by mistake he was Re. 1-4-0 short in the amount which he had deposited in respect of commission. The deficiency he made up as soon as it was pointed out to him, but after the thirty days had expired. The learned District Munsiff excused the delay on the ground that it was due to a bona fide mistake. But the learned District Judge of Coimbatore has taken the view that the District Munsiff had not jurisdiction to excuse the delay.

For the petitioner I have been referred to cases decided by the Patna High Court and it has been argued that the delay can be excused either on the ground that the mistake was not that of the payer but of the clerk who received the lodgment schedule who should have pointed out the error, or that the small deficiency which led to the delay should be excused on the principle of de,minims non curate lex or again that the amount paid towards poundage could have been appropriated towards the payment of interest, as the limitation of thirty days does not apply to the payment of poundage. The last two contention