Breaking Supreme Court Legal Update
New Delhi · Friday, 31 July 2026 9888666310 | [email protected]
Free Law — free judgments and free headnotes Free Lawby De Jure
Supreme Court of India 2024-05-03 allowed

KANIHYA @ KANHI (DEAD) THROUGH LRS vs SUKHI RAM & ORS

Bench: 2 — Rajesh Bindal, Prasanna Bhalachandra Varale

In Brief

In a pre-emption case, the trial court decreed a suit and required the decree holder (appellants' predecessor) to deposit ₹9,214 minus one-fifth (already paid) by October 1988. An application with a treasury challan was filed seeking to deposit ₹7,600, which the court approved. The amount was deposited but was found short by ₹14. When the decree holder later sought permission to deposit this deficit, the trial court and high court rejected the plea on grounds that the time had expired. The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, holding that under Section 148 CPC, courts retain discretion to extend deposit time for small deficiencies caused by bona fide calculation errors, especially when the error was not caught by the court when reviewing the original application.

The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.

Civil Procedure Pre-emption Deposit of Money Extension of Time Discretionary Relief Calculation Error

Read the full judgment & headnote. It's free.

Register to read the complete Supreme Court judgment text and the headnote, and to search 1 lakh+ Supreme Court judgments by meaning. It is a free service.

Register Free Login