Madras High Court
Karix Mobile Private Limited vs Oasys Cybernetics Private ... on 5 September, 2022
C.S.(Comm. Div.)No.107 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Dated: 05.09.2022
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.SUNDAR
C.S.(Comm. Div.)No.107 of 2022
Karix Mobile Private Limited
(previously known as Tanla Corporation Pvt. Ltd.,)
Represented by its Company Secretary and
Authorized Signatory Ms.Seshanuradha Chava
having its registered office at
Tania Technology Centre, Hi-Tech City Road,
Madhapur, Hyderabad, Telangana - 500 081. .. Plaintiff
Vs.
OASYS Cybernetics Private Limited
(Omne Gate Systems)
Represented by its Managing Director
Mr.Illanghovan Krishnaswamy Ramajayam
having its registered office at OAS Towers,
No.3/4, Stringers Road, Vepery,
Periamet, Chennai-600 003. .. Defendant
This Civil Suit is preferred, under Order IV Rule 1 of the Original
Side Rules 1994 read with Order VII Rule 1 of CPC and Section 7 of the
Commercial Courts, Commercial Division and Commercial Appellate
Division of High Court Act, 2015,
Page Nos.1/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.S.(Comm. Div.)No.107 of 2022
(a) directing the defendant to pay the plaintiff a sum of
Rs.1,22,80,170/- (Rupees One Crore Twenty Two Lakhs Eighty
Thousand One Hundred and Seventy Only) consisting of the principal
sum of Rs.84,81,410/- (Rupees Eighty Four Lakhs Eighty One Thousand
Four Hundred and Ten Rupees) and interest thereon at the rate of 15%
per annum amounting to Rs.37,98,760/- (Rupees Thirty Seven Lakhs
Ninety Eight Thousand Seven Hundred and Sixty Only) from the due
dates till 28.04.2022;
(b) directing the defendant to pay the plaintiff pendent lite and
future interest at 15% per annum on the principal sum of Rs.84,81,410/-
(Rupees Eighty Four Lakhs Eighty One Thousand Four Hundred and Ten
Only) from the date of the plaint till the date of realization;
(c) direct the defendant to pay costs of the suit to the plaintiffs;
For Plaintiff : Mr.V.V.Sivakumar
For Defendant : Mr.Harshavardhan .S
representing Mr.R.Ramesh
JUDGMENT
Mr.V.V.Sivakumar, learned counsel on record for sole plaintiff
and Mr.Harshavardhan.S, learned counsel representing Mr.R.Ramesh,
counsel on record for lone defendant are before this Court.
2. Both learned counsel draw the attention of this Court to a memo
dated 25.08.2022 and a scanned reproduction of the same is as follows:
Page Nos.2/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.S.(Comm. Div.)No.107 of 2022
Page Nos.3/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.S.(Comm. Div.)No.107 of 2022
3. Adverting to the aforementioned memo more particularly,
paragraph No.5, both learned counsel submit that the captioned matter
has since been settled out of Court and monies have also been paid out as
per the terms of settlement. To be noted, a memo is filed to bring to the
notice of a Court a obtaining factual position as between the parties.
4. In this view of the matter, as there is no disputation as between
both parties that the captioned suit has been settled out of Court, learned
counsel for plaintiff, adverting to Section 69-A of 'Tamil Nadu Court-
Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1955 [Act No.XIV of 1955] as amended in
Page Nos.4/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.S.(Comm. Div.)No.107 of 2022
2017 (Act 6 of 2017)' [hereinafter 'TN Court Fees Act' for brevity and
convenience] requests for refund of Court fee. To be noted, Section 69-
A of TN Court Fees Act reads as follows:
'Section 69-A. Refund on Settlement of disputes under
Section 89 of Code of Civil Procedure:
Where the Court refers the parties to the suit to any of the
modes of settlement of dispute referred to in Section 89 of the
Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (Central Act V of 1908), the fee
paid shall be refunded upon such reference. Such refund need not
await for settlement of the dispute.'
5. This takes us to Section 89 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908
(Central Act V of 1908) [hereinafter 'CPC' for the sake of brevity] which
reads as follows:
'89. Settlement of disputes outside the Court.-
(1) Where it appears to the court that there exist
elements of a settlement which may be acceptable to the
parties, the court shall formulate the terms of settlement and
give them to the parties for their observations and after
receiving the observation of the parties, the court may
reformulate the terms of a possible settlement and refer the
same for—
(a) arbitration;
(b) conciliation
(c) judicial settlement including settlement through Lok
Page Nos.5/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.S.(Comm. Div.)No.107 of 2022
Adalat; or
(d) mediation.
(2) Where a dispute has been referred—
(a) for arbitration or conciliation, the provisions of the
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (26 of 1996) shall
apply as if the proceedings for arbitration or conciliation were
referred for settlement under the provisions of that Act.
(b) to Lok Adalat, the court shall refer the same to the
Lok Adalat in accordance with the provisions of sub-section
(1) of section 20 of the Legal Services Authority Act, 1987 (39
of 1987) and all other provisions of that Act shall apply in
respect of the dispute so referred to the Lok Adalat;
(c) for judicial settlement, the court shall refer the same
to a suitable institution or person and such institution or
person shall be deemed to be a Lok Adalat and all the
provisions of the Legal Services Authority Act, 1987 (39 of
1987) shall apply as if the dispute were referred to a Lok
Adalat under the provisions of that Act;
(d) for mediation, the court shall effect a compromise
between the parties and shall follow such procedure as may be
prescribed.'
6. Therefore, mediation is one of the modes of settlement
contemplated vide Section 69-A of TN Court Fees Act. As the lis is
settled out of Court albeit by resorting to mediation, request for refund of
Court fee is acceded to.
Page Nos.6/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.S.(Comm. Div.)No.107 of 2022
7. Learned counsel for plaintiff submits that all necessary steps
would be taken and procedural requirements will be complied with qua
refund of Court fee. Registry to process the same and refund the Court
fee (after making standard statutory deductions, if any and by following
standard procedures) by way of an instrument drawn in favour of
plaintiff company [Karix Mobile Private Limited] as expeditiously as the
business of the Registry would permit and in any event, within six weeks
from today i.e., on or before 10.10.2022.
8. Captioned Civil Suit disposed of as settled out of Court. There
shall be no order as to costs.
05.09.2022
Index : Yes/No
Speaking/Non-speaking order
mk
Page Nos.7/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.S.(Comm. Div.)No.107 of 2022
M.SUNDAR, J.
mk
C.S.(Comm. Div.)No.107 of 2022
05.09.2022
Page Nos.8/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
