Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Dudala Sarojinamma Died vs Vannepenta Ramanamma on 13 October, 2023
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T.MALLIKARJUNA RAO
I.A.No.1 of 2023
in
APPEAL SUIT No.08 OF 2011
ORDER:
1. It is an application filed by the petitioner/1st respondent seeking
extension of time for depositing balance sale consideration amount vide
Decree and Judgment dated 04.07.2023 in A.S.No.08 of 2011.
2. It is contended by the petitioner in the affidavit that she is unable
to deposit the amount within two months as prescribed by this Court.
3. The 3rd respondent/appellant filed counter by contending that the
time prescribed by this Court for paying the balance of sale consideration
amount cannot be extended.
4. Heard both sides and perused the record.
5. Now, the point for determination is:
Whether the time can be extended as sought for by the petitioner?
POINT:
6. The petitioner/plaintiff filed the suit in O.S.No.67 of 2007 on the
file of Principal District Judge, Nellore, for specific performance of
agreement of sale dated 29.12.2006. The suit was decreed by the trial
Court. The trial Court directed the defendants/appellants to receive the
balance sale consideration from the plaintiff within one month. The
petitioner/plaintiff herein deposited the remaining sale consideration in
the trial Court. Later, the defendants preferred this appeal and obtained
stay of all further proceedings pursuant to the decree and judgment
dated 14.12.2010. Later, the petitioner filed an application before the
T.M.R.,J
I.A.No.1 of 2023 in
A.S.No.08 of 2011
trial Court seeking to withdraw the deposited amounts on the strength of
this Court order permitting her to withdraw the deposited amount. As
the petitioner herein deposited the amount in pursuance of the judgment
passed by trial Court in O.S.No.67 of 2007, as such, now it cannot be
contended that the petitioner has always not been ready and willing to
perform her part of contract.
7. This Court vide judgment dated 04.07.2023 in A.S.No.08 of 2011
directed the petitioner to deposit the balance sale consideration amount
within two (2) months from the date of judgment. But, the petitioner has
come up with this petition by contending that to comply with the
directions of this Court, her husband sold away five house plots and
entered into agreement of sale with one Ankem Harikrishna and received
an amount of Rs.7,00,000/- as an advance. In support of her
contention, she has also placed the Xerox copy of the agreement. This
Court is not supposed to express any opinion regarding the correctness
of the execution of the agreement. However, it is the contention of the
petitioner that non-depositing of the amount is neither willful nor
wanton. Though, the respondent counsel vehemently opposed to grant of
time, but considering the submissions made on behalf of the petitioner,
she will able to secure the amount required to deposit within one week.
This Court views that it is a fit case to extend time for one (1) week.
T.M.R.,J
I.A.No.1 of 2023 in
A.S.No.08 of 2011
8. Accordingly, the petitioner is allowed. The petitioner is permitted
to deposit the balance sale consideration amount as directed by this
Court in A.S.No.08 of 2011 within one (1) week from the date of this
order.
___________________________________
JUSTICE T. MALLIKARJUNA RAO
Date:13.10.2023
MS
T.M.R.,J
I.A.No.1 of 2023 in
A.S.No.08 of 2011
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T.MALLIKARJUNA RAO
I.A.No.1 of 2023
in
APPEAL SUIT No.08 OF 2011
Date:13.10.2023
MS
