Jackson, J.

1. The petitioner seeks to revise the order of the Additional Subordinate Judge, Masulipatam, in C.M.P. No. 299 of 1925.

2. The petitioner was defendant in O.S. No. 308 of 1922 brought by counter-petitioner, the plaintiff, for specific performance of a contract to sell immoveable property. It was decreed against the petitioner that, on counter-petitioner depositing Rs. 300 in three weeks from the date of the decree, the petitioner should execute a sale-deed and put counter-petitioner in possession of the property (Appeal No. 39 of 1923, Additional Subordinate Judge, Masulipatam). The counter-petitioner did not deposit the amount within three weeks and applied after the expiry of that period for extension of time. The learned Additional Subordinate Judge extended the time accordingly and hence this revision petition.

3. There is clear authority that in suits under the Specific Relief Act where the decree has named as here a time within which payment should be made the Court can extend that period. See Abdul Shaker Sahib v. Abdul Rahiman Sahib.(1922) I.L.R. 46 M. 148 : 44 M.L.J. 107

4. It would hardly avail the petitioner in these proceedings to contend that there is