Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
M.NAGAPRASANNA
HDFC Bank Ltd., (Formerly HDFC Ltd. Prior To Amalgamation), Represented By Mr. Shridhar Chinni – Appellant
Versus
Registrar, City Civil Court, City Civil Court Complex, K.G. Road, bengaluru – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. withdrawal of suit due to jurisdiction issue. (Para 1 , 3 , 7) |
| 2. counsel's argument for court fee refund. (Para 4) |
| 3. respondent's counterargument on court fee refund. (Para 5) |
| 4. court discusses jurisdictional incompetence and court fee refund. (Para 6 , 16) |
| 5. judicial reasoning on the court fee issue. (Para 12 , 13) |
| 6. grounds for refund as per jurisdiction. (Para 14 , 15) |
| 7. final order granting court fee refund. (Para 17) |
ORDER :
(M. NAGAPRASANNA, J.)
The petitioner in all these cases is the HDFC Bank Limited. The Bank is calling in question an office note by the Registry of the concerned Court, which directs that there is no warrant to refund the Court fee in the light of the dismissal of the suit.
2. Heard Smt. Charu Atrey, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri. T.P.Vivekananda, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.1, in all these cases.
3. The petitioner is the Bank. The respondent therein initiated certain proceedings for recovery of the money that it had lend to respective borrowers by instituting a suit in O.S.No.3785/2023 on 20.06.2023. It transpires that the amalgamation of the bank takes place after the institution of the suit on 06.11.2
Court fees must be refunded when a suit is dismissed due to lack of jurisdiction, establishing a right to full refund in such cases.
The court established that litigants have an inherent right to a refund of court fees when their application is disposed of as infructuous, despite the absence of an explicit statutory provision for ....
Section 70 of the Act comes into play only when there is no adjudicatory process.
Point of law :Recall of compromise decree - Application for recalling of a compromise decree has to be filed only before the Court that had recorded the compromise in terms of Order XXIII Rule 3(a) o....
The court lacks power to refund court fees if withdrawn appeals do not meet statutory refund conditions under applicable acts.
Court fees should be refunded even when cases settle out of court, promoting private dispute resolution methods, which supports judicial efficiency.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that parties involved in a compromise under Order 23 Rule 3 of CPC are entitled to a refund of Court Fees under Section 89 of the CPC and Section 1....
The court affirmed the right to court fee refunds upon referral to arbitration, emphasizing that such a referral entitles plaintiffs to refunds irrespective of arbitration outcomes.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
