In Brief
In this civil appeal, the Supreme Court addressed whether a decree-holder in a specific performance suit can execute a decree after the stipulated deposit period has expired without obtaining an extension of time. The case involved a decree for specific performance of a property sale with a two-month deposit period that was missed by the decree-holders. The Court held that failure to deposit the decretal amount within the specified period, without securing an extension or explaining the delay, renders the decree non-executable. The fact that the judgment-debtor had not sought rescission under Section 28 of the Specific Relief Act does not automatically permit execution. The appeal was allowed and the decree-holders were permitted to withdraw their deposited amount.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.