Tarun Agarwala, J.

Heard Sri Santosh Kumar Srivastava, the learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri A.P. Tiwari, the learned Counsel appearing for respondent No. 3.

2. The plaintiff respondent No. 3 filed a suit for specific performance, which was decreed by a judgment dated 5.2.2006. The petitioner filed an appeal. A sum of Rs. 11,697 towards court fee was required to paid by the appellant. The petitioner appellant presented the memorandum of appeal by depositing a sum of Rs. 665 and moved an application seeking time to deposit the remaining court fee. The court vide order dated 9.3.2005 and 15.4.2005 granted time to the appellant to deposit the deficiency of court fee. It transpires that on 16.5.2005, the petitioner deposited a further sum of Rs. 6,500 and prayed further time to deposit the balance amount towards the deficiency of the court fee. The Court rejected the application for the extension of the time. It transpires that the petitioner moved a recall application and during the pendency of the recall application, deposited the balance sum of Rs. 4,300 towards the deficiency of court fee and submitted before the Court that now the entire court fee had been deposit