Mangubai @ Mangibai vs Deceased Amarchand Thru. Lrs. ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 7352 MP

                                       IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                     AT INDORE
                                                   BEFORE LOK ADALAT

                                       HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR (VERMA)
                                                             &
                                            SMT. RUKMANI DHANGAR , ADVOCATE

                                                  ON THE 14th OF MAY, 2022

                                               FIRST APPEAL No. 415 of 2018
              Between:-
              1.

MANGUBAI @ MANGIBAI W/O LATE MUKUND DAGI, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, 45-KA, KOTHARI NAGAR, MANDSAUR (MADHYA PRADESH)

2. SMT. ASHA W/O SURESH , AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, 45-KA, KOTHARI NAGAR, MANDSAUR (MADHYA PRADESH) ...APPELLANTS (BY SHRI NITIN PHADKE, ADVOCATE)

AND DECEASED AMARCHAND THRU. LRS. KAMALKUMAR S/O NEMICHAND KOTHARI, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, JEEVAGANJ, MANDSAUR (M.P.)

SMT. ABHA W/O DILIP JAIN, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, 28, SCHEME NO. 1, ROAD NO.3, NAI ABADI, MANDSAUR (M.P.)

COLLECTOR, THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH DIST.:MANDSAUR (MADHYA PRADESH)

(SHRI SATISH JAIN, ADVOCATE-RES NO.1)

SUMA Digitally signed by SUMATHI JAGADEESAN DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH BENCH INDORE, ou=JUDICIAL,

THI postalCode=452001, st=Madhya Pradesh, 2.5.4.20=2c031063fea95cabb51 a5432c9ce6df4c49ae556251c6a

JAGAD 1b1fca11a86643b2a2, pseudonym=BEF252392AFC4F7 48B6F8C1E18D805F7FACD91F2, serialNumber=28E58B6FE482FD 4DF2469FAAFF13E836178C3C8

EESAN 1533BF4D0F8641FFAB3DD337B, cn=SUMATHI JAGADEESAN Date: 2022.05.17 12:41:12 +05'30' This appeal coming on for conciliation this day, the Bench passed the

following:

AWARD Heard on IA No.2061/2021, an application under Order 23 Rule 1 of

Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 for settlement of the matter in the light of

compromise arrived at between the parties.

The contents of the aforesaid interlocutory application are reproduced as

under: -

"(v) ;g fd] vihykFkhZx.k ;g Lohdkj djrs gS fd Hkw[k.M dzekad 106 ,oa 106&, dksBkjh uxj] fdfV;kuh] eanlkSj (tks fdfV;kuh ds losZ dzekad [email protected] jdck 1-672 gsDVj dk va'kHkkx gS) ftldh prq%lhek fuEukuqlkj gS %& iwoZ esa %& xyh if'pe esa %& dkWyksuh ekxZ mRrj esa %& Hkw[k.M dzekad 107 nf{k.k esa %& Hkw[k.M dzekad 108 ds laca/k esa vihykFkhZ dks LoRo ,oa vf/kiR; izkIr uk gksdj nkfo;k laifRr izR;FkhZ dzekad 1 ds ,dy LokfeRo ,oa vf/kiR; dh gksdj vihykFkhZx.k }kjk Hkfo"; esa mDr Hkw[k.Mks ds LokfeR; vFkok vf/kiR; ds laca/k esa izR;FkhZ Ã Â ekad 1 ds fo:) dksbZ Dyse vFkok nkok ugh fd;k tkosxkA

(c) ;g fd] fopkj.k U;k;ky; }kjk ikfjr fu.kZ; ,oa t;i= fnukad 17-11-2017 ds ikyu esa izR;FkhZ dzaekad 2 }kjk nkfo;k laifRRk dk vf/kiR; izR;FkhZ dzekad 1 dey dqekj dksBkjh dks i`Fkd le>kSrs ds varxZRk iznku fd;k tk pqdk gS o Hkfo"; esa SUMA Digitally signed by SUMATHI JAGADEESAN DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH BENCH

THI INDORE, ou=JUDICIAL, postalCode=452001, st=Madhya Pradesh, 2.5.4.20=2c031063fea95cabb51a 5432c9ce6df4c49ae556251c6a1b

JAGAD 1fca11a86643b2a2, pseudonym=BEF252392AFC4F74 8B6F8C1E18D805F7FACD91F2, serialNumber=28E58B6FE482FD 4DF2469FAAFF13E836178C3C81

EESAN 533BF4D0F8641FFAB3DD337B, cn=SUMATHI JAGADEESAN Date: 2022.05.17 12:41:35 +05'30' nkfo;k laifRr ds laca/k esa vihykFkhZx.k ds fo:) {kfriwfrZ dk vFkok fdlh izdkj dk vU; dksbZ Dyse izLrqr fd;s tkus ij mDRk Dyse dh larqf"V gsrq izR;FkhZ dzekad 1 mRrjnk;h jgsaxsA

(l) ;g fd] fopkj.k U;k;ky; }kjk fu.kZ; ,oa t;i= fnukad 17- 11-2017 ds varxZr iznku fd;s x;s e/;orhZ ykHk vFkok okn O;; vkfn ds laca/k esa izR;FkhZ dzekad 1 dey dqekj dksBkjh }kjk vihykFkhZx.k ds fo:) dksbZ Hkh Dysse ugh fd;k tkosxk rFkk ml ckcn olwyh dh dksbZ dk;Zokgh ugh dh tkosxhA "

The aforesaid application has been signed by both the parties and both the

parties have furnished affidavit in support the application.

Shri Nitin Phadke, learned counsel for the appellant / plaintiff submits

that the matter has been compromised between the parties as per the aforesaid

interlocutory application, hence, IA No.2601/2021 be allowed; and the present

first appeal be permitted to be withdrawn simplicitor.

Prayer appears reasonable, accordingly, IA No.2601/2021 is allowed.

The application shall be treated as part and parcel of this award. First Appeal

No.415/2018 is dismissed as withdrawn.

Learned counsel for the appellant has also prayed for refund of the court fee

and in this regard he has placed reliance upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court

in the case of The High Court of Judicature at Madras Rep. by its Registrar

General Vs. M.C. Subramaniam dated 17.2.2021 passed in SLP (Civil) Nos.3063-

3064 of 2021, wherein it has been held that:-

SUMAT Digitally signed by SUMATHI JAGADEESAN DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH BENCH

HI INDORE, ou=JUDICIAL, postalCode=452001, st=Madhya Pradesh, 2.5.4.20=2c031063fea95cabb51a5 432c9ce6df4c49ae556251c6a1b1f

JAGADE ca11a86643b2a2, pseudonym=BEF252392AFC4F748 B6F8C1E18D805F7FACD91F2, serialNumber=28E58B6FE482FD4

ESAN DF2469FAAFF13E836178C3C8153 3BF4D0F8641FFAB3DD337B, cn=SUMATHI JAGADEESAN Date: 2022.05.17 12:41:51 +05'30' "21. Thus, in our view, the High Court was correct in holding that Section 89 of the CPC and Section 69-A of the 1955 Act be interpreted liberally. In view of this broad purposive construction, we affirm the High Court's conclusion, and hold that Section 89 of CPC shall cover, and the benefit of Section 69-A of the 1955 Act shall also extend to, all methods of out-of-court dispute settlement between parties that the Court subsequently finds to have been legally arrived at. This would, thus, cover the present controversy, wherein a private settlement was arrived at, and a memo to withdraw the appeal was filed before the High Court. In such a case as well, the appellant i.e., Respondent No.1 herein would be entitled to refund of court fee."

In view of the law laid down by the Apex Court Registry is directed to refund

the court fee deposited by the appellant before the Court within 30 days as per the

rules.

Accordingly, the appeal stands disposed of.

Certified copy, as per Rules.

        (RAJENDRA KUMAR (VERMA))                                                (SMT. RUKMANI DHANGAR )
             MEMBER                                                                     MEMBER




SUMA

Digitally signed by SUMATHI JAGADEESAN DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH BENCH INDORE, ou=JUDICIAL,

THI postalCode=452001, st=Madhya Pradesh, 2.5.4.20=2c031063fea95cabb51 a5432c9ce6df4c49ae556251c6a 1b1fca11a86643b2a2,

JAGAD pseudonym=BEF252392AFC4F7 48B6F8C1E18D805F7FACD91F2 , serialNumber=28E58B6FE482F

EESAN D4DF2469FAAFF13E836178C3C 81533BF4D0F8641FFAB3DD337 B, cn=SUMATHI JAGADEESAN Date: 2022.05.17 12:42:09 +05'30'