Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: E commerce in Simbus Technologies Private Limited vs M/S Vector E-Commerce Pvt Ltd on 14 August, 2018Matching Fragments
Mr.C.K.Nandakumar, Adv. for petitioner. Mr.Vikram A.Huilgol, HCGP for respondent.
1. The petitioner, Simbus Technologies Private Limited has filed this writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, aggrieved by the order dated 28.10.2016 passed by the learned Trial Court below refusing to refund the Court fees in terms of Section 66 Date of order : 14.08.2018 in WP No.7304/2017 Simbus Technologies Private Limited vs. M/s. Vector E-Commerce Pvt. Ltd. and Another of the Karnataka Court - Fees and Suits Valuation Act 1958, (for short hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' for brevity). on the ground that the suit was disposed of upon a settlement/compromise after the evidence had commenced in the course of trial.
2. The operative portion of the said order is quoted below for ready reference:
"The plaintiff has sought return of court fee in view of amendment brought to the Sec.66 of Karnataka Court-Fees Act after evidence is commenced. The Plaintiff is not entitled for refund of court fee. Hence, the prayer of refund of court fee is rejected."
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has urged before the Court that the amendment provision of Section 66 of the Act, substituted with effect from 21.01.2015 which directs under Sub-Section (1) of Date of order : 14.08.2018 in WP No.7304/2017 Simbus Technologies Private Limited vs. M/s. Vector E-Commerce Pvt. Ltd. and Another Section 66 that whether the dispute is settled in any of the modes prescribed under Section 89 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 75% of the Court fees shall be ordered to be refunded to the parties by whom the same has been respectively paid.
4. He submitted that the learned Court below has not taken note of the said provisions of Sub-section (1) of Section 66 of the Act. Though, admittedly, dispute in the present case was referred to mediation under Section 89 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 and the same has resulted in settlement between the parties, and the said settlement of memorandum dated 28.10.2016 was only affirmed by the learned Court below under Rules 24 and 25 of Karnataka Civil Procedure (Mediation Rules, 2005) r/w Section 89 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, he submitted that since mediation is one of the prescribed and alternative mode Date of order : 14.08.2018 in WP No.7304/2017 Simbus Technologies Private Limited vs. M/s. Vector E-Commerce Pvt. Ltd. and Another of dispute resolution as stipulated under Section 89 of the Code of Civil Procedure therein, therefore, the learned Court below bound to refund 75% of the Court fees paid for institution of the said suit, which in the present case amounts to `1,48,950.
5. Learned AGA has not opposed the said submission.
6. Section 66 of the Karnataka Court-Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1958, is quoted below for ready reference :
"66. Refund on settlement before hearing:-(1) Where the Court refers the parties to the suit to any one of the modes of settlement of dispute referred to in Section 89 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 and the dispute is settled, seventy-five per cent of the amount of Court fee paid in respect of the claim or claims in the suits shall be Date of order : 14.08.2018 in WP No.7304/2017 Simbus Technologies Private Limited vs. M/s. Vector E-Commerce Pvt. Ltd. and Another ordered by the Court to be refunded to the parties by whom the same have been respectively paid.