A.No.4252 of 2011 in C.S.No.51 of 2005 VINOD K.SHARMA, J. This application has been moved by the applicants/plaintiffs, for condoning the delay of 506 days for compliance of the order of this Court dated 29.03.2010, directing the payment of cost. 2. The operative part of the order dated 29.03.2010 reads as under:- "43.A perusal of the details given in the schedule would make it very clear that the plaintiff only wanted to give more details with regard to their earlier averments and therefore, if the amendment as sought for is allowed, it would not alter the nature of the suit nor it would bring in a new cause of action. Therefore, I am inclined to allow A.No.6979 of 2007 on condition that the plaintiffs pay a sum of Rs.1000/- to the Hon'ble Chief Justice Relief Fund within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It is made clear that if the cost of Rs.1000/- is not paid as stipulated above, A.No.6979 of 2007 would be dismissed automatically without further reference to this court." 3.The applicants have moved Application No.6979 of 2007 for amendment of plaint, which was allowed by this Court subject to payment of cost. 4. In the order, it was specifically mentioned that in the event of non-payment of cost, the application would be deemed to have been dismissed. 5. The amendment was subject to payment of cost. The direction for payment of cost passed under Section 35-B of the Code of Civil Procedure, is mandatory. Though for want of cost on the date fixed for compliance, some concession can be shown to the applicants, but, the reading of the order shows that this Court had ordered, that in the event of non-payment of cost, the amendment application would be deemed to have been dismissed. 6. In view of the order and keeping in view the mandatory provision of Section 35-B of the Code of Civil Procedure, this Court is not competent to grant extension of time, as the inherent powers cannot be exercised to overcome the statutory bar. Otherwise also as the application for amendment is deemed to be dismissed, therefore, the remedy, if any with the applicant, is to file a review. No merit. Dismissed. 08.12.2011 Index: Yes Internet: Yes jrl/ar A.No.4252 of 2011 in C.S.No.51 of 2005