ASHOK KUMAR AHUJA Vs. JANKI DEVI AASNANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) None for the respondents. Despite service of the respondents, they have chosen not to appear before the Court.

(2.) This petition is being filed assailing the order dtd. 6/1/2024 passed in Case No.625 of 2022 whereby the learned Trial Court has denied for refund of the Court Fees amounting to Rs.2,18,000.00 paid in RCSA No.01/2013.

(3.) It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner/plaintiff filed a civil suit for Specific Performance of Contract dtd. 1/8/2008 against the respondents/defendants. During the pendency of the suit, the plaintiff and the defendants have entered into a compromise outside the Court and he filed an application under Order 23 Rule 1 of Code of Civil Procedure on 4/8/2021 seeking withdrawal of the suit on the basis of the compromise. The said application was allowed by the learned Trial Court and the suit was dismissed on the basis of the compromise entered into between the parties as the plaintiff does not want any action against the defendants. It is pointed out that the agreement entered into between the parties was alleged to be forged and fabricated for which a criminal complaint was filed on the basis of which Criminal Case No.1112 of 2009 was registered at Police Station Civil Line, District Rewa for offence under Sec. 419, 419 read with Sec. 120-B, 465 read with Sec. 120-B, 467, 467 read with Sec. 120-B, 468, 468 read with Sec. 120-B of Indian Penal Code. The case was committed to the Court of Session and was registered as Session Trial No.300362/2011. The petitioner was acquitted vide judgment of acquittal dtd. 28/9/2022 from all the charges. It is argued that once the proceedings have been concluded in terms of outside Court settlement, therefore, in terms of Sec. 16 of the Court Fees Act, the petitioner was entitled to refund of Court Fees of Rs.2,18,000.00. He filed an application under Order 47 Rule 1 of Code of Civil Procedure seeking review of the order dtd. 4/8/2021 along with the application under Sec. 5 of the Limitation Act seeking condonation of delay in filing the review. The said application was dismissed by the learned Trial Court.