Case Note & Summary
The petitioners, L. Dayananda Reddy and Gayathri D., filed a civil revision petition under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, challenging an order dated 08.04.2021 passed by the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Bengaluru Rural District, in O.S. No.960/2019. The trial court had rejected their application under Section 66(2)(a) of the Karnataka Court Fee and Suits Valuation Act, 1958, read with Section 151 CPC, seeking refund of court fee of Rs.2,63,000/- paid at the time of instituting the suit. The background facts reveal that the second respondent (defendant in the suit) had earlier filed a suit for specific performance in O.S. No.1680/2018, which ended in a compromise decree. The petitioners, claiming that the compromise was obtained by fraud without their consent, filed O.S. No.960/2019 seeking annulment of that compromise decree. Subsequently, that suit was also compromised, and the compromise decree in O.S. No.1680/2018 was set aside. The petitioners then applied for refund of the court fee paid in O.S. No.960/2019, which was rejected by the trial court. The High Court, after hearing the parties, observed that once the compromise decree is set aside, the suit is disposed of without a trial on merits. Relying on the provisions of Section 66(2)(a) of the Karnataka Court Fee and Suits Valuation Act, 1958, which mandates refund of court fee when a suit is compromised or a decree is set aside, the High Court held that the petitioners are entitled to the refund. The court allowed the revision petition, set aside the trial court's order, and directed the refund of the court fee of Rs.2,63,000/- to the petitioners.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure - Court Fee Refund - Section 66(2)(a) of Karnataka Court Fee and Suits Valuation Act, 1958 - Refund of court fee when suit is compromised or decree set aside - The petitioners filed a suit for annulment of a compromise decree obtained by fraud. The suit was compromised and the compromise decree was set aside. The trial court rejected the application for refund of court fee. The High Court held that once the compromise decree is set aside, the suit is deemed to have been disposed of without a trial on merits, and the court fee paid is liable to be refunded under Section 66(2)(a) of the Act. (Paras 5-8)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the petitioners are entitled to refund of court fee paid in a suit that was subsequently compromised and the compromise decree set aside on the ground of fraud.
Final Decision
The revision petition is allowed. The order dated 08.04.2021 passed by the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Bengaluru Rural District, in O.S. No.960/2019 is set aside. The trial court is directed to refund the court fee of Rs.2,63,000/- to the petitioners.
Law Points
- Court fee refund
- Section 66(2)(a) Karnataka Court Fee and Suits Valuation Act
- 1958
- compromise decree set aside
- fraud on court
- suit for annulment of decree
