IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.M. No.18078-CII of 2011 and C.R No.4211 of 2010 Date of Decision:- 2.8.2011 Gurbachan Singh ....Petitioner vs. Karamjit Kaur and another ....Respondents *** CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE ARVIND KUMAR *** Present:- Mr. N.S.Dadwal, Advocate, for the applicant-petitioner. *** ARVIND KUMAR, J. C.M. No.18078-CII of 2011 The defendants have not been served despite number of notices sent. They were also ex-parte in the Court below. The application for their substituted service is dismissed as withdrawn. At the request of counsel for the petitioner that issue involved is very minor, the hearing of the case is pre-poned for today. C.R No.4211 of 2010: The present petitioner filed suit for specific performance of agreement dated 28.4.1980, titled Gurbachan Singh v. Karamjit Kaur and another. The defendants were proceeded ex-parte. An ex-parte judgment and decree dated 9.1.2008 was passed in favour of the plaintiff with a direction to deposit the balance sale consideration of Rs.7000/- in Court within one month and thereafter the defendants shall execute the sale-deed in terms of agreement, Exhibit P-1, in favour of the plaintiff within two months failing which the plaintiff would have the right to get executed the sale-deed through intervention of the Court. Defendants were also restrained from dispossessing the plaintiff from the suit property. The said amount of Rs.7000/- was not deposited within the stipulated period. However, an application was moved on 21.5.2008 for extending the time to C.R No.4211 of 2010 -2- deposit Rs.7000/- with the plea that plaintiff’s counsel had applied for certified copy of the ex-parte judgment and decree which was received on 29.4.2008 and it is only then plaintiff came to know about the said direction to deposit the balance sale consideration of Rs.7000/- in Court within one month. The application has been dismissed vide impugned order dated 27.4.2010 passed by the Additional Civil Judge (Sr .Division), Ludhiana. Hence, this revision. Heard. Under Section 148 of the Code of Civil Procedure, it has been provided that where any period is fixed or granted by the Court for doing of any act prescribed or allowed, the Court may in its discretion, from time to time, enlarge such period. In the instant case, no condition was imposed in case of default of deposit of Rs.7000/-. It looks that it was the counsel for the plaintiff-petitioner who had applied late to get a certified copy of judgment and decree. In the ends of justice, it is a fit case where the petitioner-plaintiff deserves extension of time. In view of this, the present revision is allowed, impugned order dated 27.4.2010 is set aside and the plaintiff is permitted to deposit the afore-stated amount within 30 days i.e. 2.9.2011. August 02, 2011 ( ARVIND KUMAR) JS JUDGE