HAJI M. ABDUL RAZAK Vs. K. ISMATH ENOON

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS second appeal, filed by defendants 1 and 2 in O.S. No. 332/2001 on the file of Principal Senior Civil Judge, Mangalore, challenging the concurrent finding of both the courts below in decreeing the suit of plaintiff for ejectment, mesne profits and delivery of vacant possession, has come up for admission this day.

(2.) THIS day, learned Counsel for the parties have filed application in IA.I/2014 under Order 23 Rule 3, CPC reporting that dispute between the parties is amicably settled. The second appellant, who was one of the partner of first appellant -firm along with his father, after the death of his father, he being the sole person in -charge of first appellant -firm as its proprietor has affixed signature to compromise petition filed under Order 23 Rule 3, CPC. The sole respondent, who is plaintiff in original suit has affixed his signature as respondent in this proceeding. The parties who are present before the Court submit that they have gone through the contents of compromise petition filed in to the Court in IA.I/2014, understood the same and agreed to abide by the same.

(3.) SINCE this appeal is settled between the parties even before it is taken up for admission, appellants are entitled to seek refund of Court fee as per the judgment rendered by the Division Bench of this Court in the matter of A. Sreeramaiah vs. The South Indian Bank Ltd., Bangalore & Anr., ( : ILR 2006 KAR 4032). The Court fee which shall be refunded shall be drawn in the name of second appellant and shall be handed over to learned Counsel Sri. G. Balakrishana Shastry, who is representing appellants 1 and 2 in this proceeding.