JAYARAMAIAH Vs. REGISTRAR CITY CIVIL COURT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present petitioner was the plaintiff before the Trial Court in a suit for declaration and injunction. On appearance of the defendant, the parties were able to settle the matter outside the Court and reported the same and sought for refund of the Court Fee. The Court below, in terms of Sec. 66 of the Karnataka Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as 'the KCFSV Act', for brevity) has directed refund of half the Court Fee and it is this which is sought to be question by the learned counsel for the petitioner.

(2.) The learned counsel for the petitioner is before this Court relying on the Division Bench decision of this Court in the case of 'A.SREERAMAIAH v. THE SOUTH INDIAN BANK LTD., BANGALORE & ANOTHER' (ILR 2006 KAR 4032. In that case, the parties before the Court were the plaintiff and the defendant, wherein the plaintiff had filed a suit for recovery of money and there was a judgment and decree, against which an appeal had been filed. The Court, after noticing the rival contentions, had observed that there was an element of a possible settlement and had suggested the terms of settlement and accordingly, the parties did settle the matter out of Court and had reported the same and thereafter, the counsel had sought that the full Court Fee be refunded on the footing that in a settlement arrived at in terms of Sec. 89 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as 'the CPC', for brevity), a party would be entitled to refund of full Court Fee under Sec. 16 of the Court Fees Act, 1870 and it is this circumstance, which was addressed by the Division Bench and ultimately it was concluded thus:

(3.) It is the above observations which the learned counsel for the petitioner seeks to press into service.