Judgment :- 1. The Civil Revision Petition has been filed seeking a direction to number the unnumbered O.S. No.... of 2013, pending on the file of the learned Principal District Judge, Tuticorin. 2. Heard the learned Counsel for the revision petitioner. 3. The learned Counsel for the revision petitioner inviting the attention of this Court to the return made by the lower Court, which is extracted under: "Returned: The prayer is discretionary in nature. Hence, the plaintiff has to satisfy the requirement by this Court. The plaint is returned in terms of the Supreme Court Judgments reported in AIR 2010 SC P.577, (2011)1SCC Page 429 etc. Hence, deposit the balance of sale consideration to satisfy your readiness and willingness. Therefore returned. 15 days time granted for representation." (Extracted as such) Would submit that the lower Court had no jurisdiction to compel the plaintiff even before numbering the suit to deposit the remaining part of the sale consideration. 4. He would also hasten to add that as per the provision of Section 16(c) of the Specific Relief Act, the deposit of the remaining part of the sale consideration is not a sine quo non for seeking specific performance and hence, the lower Court was not justified in issuing such direction. 5. I would like to point out that there is no infirmity in the direction given by the Court, calling upon the plaintiff to deposit the remaining part of the sale consideration in order to establish his readiness and willingness to prove his part of the contract. However, the direction is enforceable only after numbering the suit. 6. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is disposed of. No costs.