SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2022 Supreme(Kar) 1512

S. VISHWAJITH SHETTY
Bhosale Bio Neem Products – Appellant
Versus
Managing Director – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
Sharanabasappa M. Patil, Advocate, Sanket Appaji, Advocate

JUDGMENT/ORDER

1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned High Court Government Pleader who was directed to assist the Court.

2. The petitioner herein who was the plaintiff in OS No.329/2012 has approached this Court invoking its jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India with a prayer to direct the Trial Court to refund the Court fee paid by him in O.S.No.329/2012.

3. Brief facts of the case as revealed from the records that would be necessary for the purpose of disposal of this writ petition are that the petitioner herein had filed a suit in OS No.329/2012 before the Court of Civil Judge at Muddebihal (hereinafter referred to as the 'Trial Court') for recovery of a sum of Rs.2, 84, 749.00=25 with interest at the rate of 24%. In the said suit, he had paid Court fee of Rs.19, 400.00. The defendant in the said suit had entered appearance and filed his written statement and at the stage of final arguments, the suit was withdrawn by the plaintiff on the ground that the dispute between the parties was settled out of the Court. Thereafterwards, an application was filed seeking refund of the Court fee paid by him. The said application was rejec

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top