SURENDER KUMAR Vs. HANS RAJ MANDI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard through video conferencing.

(2.) The counsel for the applicant-appellant contended that since the dispute between the parties has been settled, in the light of the principles enshrined in Sec. 16 of the Court Fees Act, 1870 and Sec. 90 CPC, the parties are entitled to be refunded the court fees paid by them in the Courts below as well as this Hon'ble Court irrespective of the fact that the settlement was reached without the intervention of the Court and outside Court.

(3.) In support of his submission, the counsel has relied upon Pradeep Sonawat vs. Satish Prakash, AIR 2015 Pb. 130; Tarun Juneja and Ors. Vs. Hukam Singh, CR. No.874 of 2009 decided on 15/9/2009; Harish Kumar I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document (deceased) through LRs vs. Pawan Kumar Sehgal, RSA. No.3645 of 2018 decided on 9/9/2019; Naresh Kumar vs. M/s Jasmer Singh Harphool Singh and Ors., RSA. No.1265 of 2019 decided on 10/9/2019; A. Sreeramaiah vs. South Indian Bank Ltd. and Anr., 2007(5) RCR (Civil) 374 [Karnataka High Court]; and Kamalamma and Ors. Vs. Honnali Taluk Agricultural Produce Coop. Marketing Society and Ors., 2009(33) RCR (Civil) 110 [Karnataka High Court].