https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=198371 A court retains power to enlarge time under Section 148 even after the original period has expired, so long as no final order disposing of the suit or proceeding has been passed; expiry of time does not by itself make the court functus officio. An order dismissing a suit for non-payment of adjournment costs is treated as an order under Order 17, Rule 3, not as a mere default of appearance under Order 9, because the concept of default is context-dependent. On that basis, such dismissal is appealable as a decree, and the suit dismissal was held unsustainable where compliance with the costs order remained possible on the reopening day. en-us Sat, 21 Aug 1976 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 30 Jan 2018 10:09:18 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=198371 A court retains power to enlarge time under Section 148 even after the original period has expired, so long as no final order disposing of the suit or proceeding has been passed; expiry of time does not by itself make the court functus officio. An order dismissing a suit for non-payment of adjournment costs is treated as an order under Order 17, Rule 3, not as a mere default of appearance under Order 9, because the concept of default is context-dependent. On that basis, such dismissal is appealable as a decree, and the suit dismissal was held unsustainable where compliance with the costs order remained possible on the reopening day. Case-Laws Indian Laws Sat, 21 Aug 1976 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=198371