1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION APPEAL NO.514 OF 2009 IN NOTICE OF MOTION NO.3008 OF 2006 IN SUMMONS FOR JUDGEMENT NO.681 OF 2005 IN SUMMARY SUIT NO.1409 OF 2005 WITH NOTICE OF MOTION NO.3956 OF 2009 K.V.Varghese, Proprietor of Anu Engineering Works ...Appellant Versus S.S.Agarwal, HUF as Karta & Proprietor of M/s.Karan Steel ...Respondents ...... Mr.A.K.J.Panicker i/b Ajay Law Associates for Appellant. Mr.T.J.Pandian for Respondents. ...... CORAM : A.M.KHANWILKAR AND A.P.DESHPANDE, JJ. DATED : DECEMBER 19, 2009. P.C. : 1. This Appeal takes exception to the Judgment passed by the learned Single Judge dated 15th October 2009 in Notice of Motion No.3008 of 2006. The Respondents have filed Summary Suit. In the said Suit, Summons for Judgment was taken out in which consent 2 order was passed. In terms of the said consent order, the Appellant was obliged to deposit sum of Rs.7,15,762/- within twelve weeks from the date of the Order. The Appellant, however, failed to deposit the amount within specified time. Instead, took out Notice of Motion for extension of time. The Appellant later on deposited sum of Rs.9,09,016/- while the Notice of Motion was pending. However, the Notice of Motion has been dismissed by the learned Single Judge on the finding that it was not open for the Court to extend time which was fixed by the parties as per the consent terms. Counsel for the Appellant relied on the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Periyakkal vs. Dakshyani reported in (1983) 2 SCC 127, in particular, exposition in Paragraph 4 of the said decision. However, now the parties have agreed for the following arrangement: (1) The Respondents will withdraw the amount of Rs.9,09,016 deposited by the Appellant in this Court without prejudice to the rights and contention of the Respondents. The Respondents shall furnish sufficient security to the satisfaction of the Prothonotary & Senior Master, which will be condition precedent for withdrawal of the said amount. 3 (2) Upon withdrawal of the amount, the Summary Suit shall stand restored. The order passed on 5th June 2006 would stand modified to the effect that the amount deposited by the Appellant will be treated as deposit made in time as per the said order. (3) Upon withdrawal of the amount, the Suit shall proceed on its own merits in accordance with law. The Defendants may file written statement within four weeks from today. (4) It is made clear that in view of this arrangement, the Suit will stand restored to the file to its original number, to be proceeded with, on its own merits in accordance with law. All questions are left open. (5) Appeal stands disposed of on the above terms. (6) In view of the above order, all derivative proceedings also stand disposed of. A.P.DESHPANDE, J. A.M.KHANWILKAR, J.