2010 (3) MPWN 54
Prakash Shrivastava, J.
Keshrimal and another
Versus
Dhanraj and others
First Appeal No. 541 of 2005 (I)
Decided on: 20.7.2010
flfoy izfdz;k lafgrk] 1908 & /kkjk 89 & U;k;ky; Qhl vf/kfu;e] 1870 & /kkjk 16 & U;k;ky; Qhl dk izfrnk; & i{kdkjksa ds e/; le>kSrs ds vk/kkj ij & U;k;ky; Qhl dk izfrnk; fd;k x;kA
¼iSjk 3½
1. Heard on IA 3884 of 2010 which has been tiled by the parties for withdrawal of the appeal on the ground that the matter has been compromised between the parties. A further prayer has been made in the application for refund of the court Fee.
2. At this stage, learned counsel for the appellant states that since the appellant, after the aforesaid compromise is also entitled to refund of the court fee as per section 89 of CPC read with section 16 of the Court-fees Act, therefore, either the present appeal may be referred to the Lok-Adalat or refund of the court fee be ordered by this Court.
3. After taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, and also the fact that the reference of the matter to the Lok-Adalat would cause unnecessary delay for disposal of the present appeal, I allow the prayer made in the application and dispose of the present appeal as withdrawn. As a result thereof, I further order to that in exercise of the powers under section 89 CPC read with section 16 of the court-fees Act, the court fee paid by the appellant on the present appeal shall be refunded, as per the procedure contained in section 16 of the court-fees Act.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.