Civil Procedure Code, 1908

— Ss. 47 & 2(2) and Or. 23 R. 3 — Decree — Validity — Failure of decree-holder to complete the sale within the time-limit fixed in the decree when not vitiative of the decree — Partition suit — Consent decree granting the plaintiff option to purchase the suit property and to complete the sale by the dates specified for the said two purposes — Plaintiff exercising the option within the time stipulated and depositing part of the price — Courts below concurrently finding that he was always ready and willing to deposit the balance amount but could not do so on account of delaying tactics of the judgment-debtors — Courts below therefore rejecting the judgment-debtors' contention that the failure of the decree-holder plaintiff to deposit the balance price within the time stipulated had rendered the decree invalid — In view of all the aspects of the matter, the said concurrent finding recorded by the two courts below, held, did not call for interference, (2006) 5 SCC 691-A

Constitution of India

— Art. 136 — Scope of interference under Art. 136 — Interim/Interlocutory orders — Nature and scope of interference — Courts below, after exhaustively dealing with the submissions of the plaintiff and the material on record and after applying their mind to the issues raised before them, concurrently finding that there was no justification for issuing an interim order as sought by the plaintiff — No extraneous matter taken into account and no perversity in appreciation of the material on record — In such circumstances, the order refusing interim relief, held, did not call for interference, (2006) 5 SCC 691-B