Madras High Court
V.Subbaraman vs P.Ramaraj on 27 March, 2017
Author: C.V.Karthikeyan
Bench: C.V.Karthikeyan
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 27.03.2017
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.V.KARTHIKEYAN
A.S.(MD)No.59 of 2007
V.Subbaraman ...
Appellant/Plaintiff
Vs.
1.P.Ramaraj
2.P.Pandiyan ...
Respondents/Defendants
Prayer:-This Appeal Suit filed under Section 96 Code of Civil Procedure,
against the Judgment and Decree passed in O.S.No.455 of 2004 on the file of
Learned Additional District Court (Fast Track Court No.4), Periyakulam, dated
22.02.2007.
!For Petitioner : Mr.A.Abdul Khader
^For Respondent : Mr.M.Balamurugan
for M/s.Ajmal Associates
:ORDER
A memo has been filed by the learned counsel for the appellant with copy served to the learned counsel for the respondent. It had been stated that pending the appeal, and even before the appeal had been heard on merits before this Court, the parties had settled the issue out of Court and the respondents have executed two sale deeds dated 29.09.2008 and 12.03.2009 in favour of the appellant. Consequently, nothing surviving as the parties have settled the matter out of Court and according to the Amended Act, 2016 under the Tamilnadu Court Fees Act, 1995 (Amended Act) under Section 69, the entire Court fees is directed to be refunded to the appellants in accordance with the Rules.
2. Hence, the appeal is dismissed as settled out of Court and refund of full Court fees in accordance with Rules is permitted. No Costs.
To The Additional District Court (Fast Track Court No.4), Periyakulam..