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

2025 Supreme(P&H) 1609

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
HARKESH MANUJA, J.
Sunder Singh – Petitioner 
Versus
Ramesh Chand and Another – Respondents
CR-2784 of 2024 (O&M)
Decided On : 15-10-2025 

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Ms. Devanshi Sharma, Adv. for Mr. Sushil Bhardwaj, Adv.
For the Respondents: Ms. Komal Sharma, DAG, Haryana.

Full court fee is refundable upon settlement at Lok Adalat, as per Sections 16 and 21 of relevant Acts.

Headnote:(A) Court Fees Act, 1870 - Section 16 - Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 - Section 21 - Refund of court fees - Petitioner sought refund of court fees upon withdrawal of suit after a settlement at Lok Adalat - Court determined that under the relevant statutory provisions, the entire court fee was to be refunded, not just a portion - Modification of prior order to grant full refund to petitioner. (Paras 2, 4, 5)

(B) Settlement - The Lok Adalat's award is deemed a decree; therefore, parties are entitled to full court fee refund upon reaching a settlement, as mandated by law. (Para 4)

Table of Content
1. refund of court fees upon withdrawal of suit with settlement. (Para 1 , 2)
2. interpretation of statutory provisions regarding court fees. (Para 3 , 4)
3. modification of lower court's order for full refund. (Para 5)
4. disposition of pending applications. (Para 6)

JUDGMENT :

HARKESH MANUJA, J.

1. By way of present revision petition, prayer has been made for setting aside of order dated 17.02.2023 (Annexure P-3) passed by the ld. Presiding Officer Daily Lok Adalat-cum-Civil Judge (Junior Division), Palwal, whereby, the prayer made on behalf of the petitioner-plaintiff for refund of remaining 50% of the Court Fees affixed on the plaint has been declined.

2. The short plea raised on behalf of the petitioner is that the suit for declaration and possession by way of specific performance as well as permanent injunction filed by the petitioner-plaintiff against the respondent was dismissed as withdrawn in view of a settlement arrived at between the parties before the ld. Daily Lok Adalat at Palwal with a direction to refund 50% of the Court fees. However, it has been submitted that in view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in case ofJage Ram vs. Ved Kaur and others ”, 2025(2) ICC 441, the entire court fee was required to be refunded.

3. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the paper book.

4. At this stage, it would be relevant to recapitulate Section 16 of the Court Fees Act, 1870 as well as Section 21 of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 and both are reproduced hereunder:-

Section 16 :-Refund of fee.-Where the Court refers the parties to the suit to anyone of the mode of settlement of dispute referred to in section 89 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908), the plaintiff shall be entitled to a certificate from the Court authorising him to receive back from the collector, the full amount of paid in respect of such plaint.

Section 21 :- Award of Lok Adalat.—1 [(1) Every award of the Lok Adalat shall be deemed to be a decree of a civil court or, as the case may be, an order of any other court and where a compromise or settlement has been arrived at, by a Lok Adalat in a case referred to it under sub-section(1) of section 20, the court-fee paid in such case shall be refunded in the manner provided under the Court-fees Act, 1870 (7 of 1870).] (2) Every award made by a Lok Adalat shall be final and binding on all the parties to the dispute, and no appeal shall lie to any court against the award.”

A perusal of aforesaid provisions shows that once a settlement has been arrived at between the parties to the lis before the Permanent Lok Adalat, the entire Court Fee needs to be refunded.

5. In view of the aforestated statutory provisions, the order dated 17.02.2023 passed by the ld. Presiding Officer Daily Lok Adalat-cum-Civil Judge (Junior Division), Palwal, is modified to the extent that the petitioner-plaintiff shall be entitled for a certificate with regard to refund of the entire amount of Court Fees affixed by him on the plaint of Civil Suit No.375-2022, titled as “Sunder Singh vs. Ramesh Chand and another”.

6. Pending application, if any, stands disposed of.

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 Back to top