' ABDUL WAHEED KHAN, J.---A suit for specific performance of contract filed by the present petitioner was decreed on 25-6-2010 from the court of Sardar Muhammad lqbal, Civil Judge 1st Class, Pattoki, in the following terms:- "The suit of the plaintiff is decreed to the shares of defendant No,1 Mst. Nooran Bibi and defendant No,2 Mst. Sughran Bibi, whereas suit to the extent of remaining defendants is dismissed. Defendant No, 1 Mst. Nooran Bibi is owner of 1-Kanal 4-Marlas, whereas defendant No,2 Mst. Sughran Bibi is owner of 2-Kanals 1-Marla of land of according to Jamabandi Exh.D-4, therefore, plaintiff is directed to deposit Rs,26,852 more with defendants Nos.1 and 2 within the period of one month. In case of non-deposit of remaining balance amount, the suit will be deemed to be dismissed."
2. On 28-7-2010, he filed an application under section 148, C.P.C. For the extension of time for the deposit of the remaining sale price as according to him he had gone Karachi and could not contact his counsel. The said application was dismissed on 25-10-2010. A revision petition filed against aforementioned order was dismissed by the court of Addl. District Judge, Pattoki vide order dated 5-5-2011. The aforementioned orders have been assailed before this Court through this Constitutional petition.
3. The counsel for the petitioner, while reiterating the contents of the petition, submits that a Civil Court is competent to extend the period for the deposit of the remaining sale price and that in the instant case the petitioner/plaintiff gave a reasonable explanation for his failure to deposit the remaining amount within the stipulated period and the civil court should not have dismissed his application mechanically as a matter of routine.
4. The counsel for the petitioner has been heard at length. The suit of the petitioner was decreed on 25-6-2010 with a specific condition and direction to deposit amount of the sale price within 30 days of the passing of the decree, which expired on 24-7-2010. The petitioner filed an application for extension of time on 28-7-2010. As per terms of the judgment and decree of the Civil Court, the suit stood automatically dismissed after the expiration of the period of one month i.e, on B 24-7- 2010 and thus the court became functus officio-. The court could not have extended the time not only because of non-compliance had operated into automatic dismissal of suit but also because a very valuable right had thereby accrued to the defendant. It has been held by Hon'ble Supreme Court in case Shujat Ali v. Muhammad Riasat and others (PLD 2006 SC 140) as under:-- "It is but obvious that once having passed a conditional decree and the suit having stood automatically dismissed for none deposit of pre-emption money, the court decreeing the suit had become functus officio."
' There is nothing to suggest that the impugned orders of the courts below are without lawful authority and of no legal effect- ' Resultantly for what has been discussed above, this petition having no force is dismissed.