https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=198314 Where a compromise is made the basis of a court order, the time fixed for depositing money becomes time allowed by the court itself, so section 148 of the Code of Civil Procedure is not excluded merely because the period was stipulated in the settlement. The court may extend that time in an appropriate case to prevent manifest injustice and relieve against a forfeiture clause, although not ordinarily or for the mere asking. The earlier authority on automatic confirmation of sale was distinguished as arising in a different statutory setting. The court held that jurisdiction existed to extend time under the compromise order, and the contrary view was erroneous. en-us Wed, 02 Mar 1983 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 29 Jan 2018 12:45:25 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=198314 Where a compromise is made the basis of a court order, the time fixed for depositing money becomes time allowed by the court itself, so section 148 of the Code of Civil Procedure is not excluded merely because the period was stipulated in the settlement. The court may extend that time in an appropriate case to prevent manifest injustice and relieve against a forfeiture clause, although not ordinarily or for the mere asking. The earlier authority on automatic confirmation of sale was distinguished as arising in a different statutory setting. The court held that jurisdiction existed to extend time under the compromise order, and the contrary view was erroneous. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 02 Mar 1983 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=198314