Remi Process Plant and Madhinery Ltd v. M/ S Fernas Construction

HIMA KOHLI, J. (Oral)

¶1Vide order dated 16.7.2015, the Joint Registrar had recorded the submission made by the counsel for the plaintiff that the plaintiff wished to withdraw the present suit.

¶2Pertinently, the defendant No.1 was represented through counsel on the said date, but no written statement had been filed by it and the name of the defendant No.2 had already been deleted vide order dated 26.3.2015.

¶3Counsel for the plaintiff reiterates the submission that his client wishes to withdraw the present suit in view of a settlement arrived at with the defendant.

¶4Leave, as prayed for, is granted. The suit is disposed of, along

with pending application.

¶5At this stage, learned counsel for the plaintiff states that as the parties have been able to arrive at a settlement prior to the pleadings being completed in the suit, the plaintiff is entitled to claim refund of 50% of the court fees in terms of Section 16-A of the Court Fees Act.

¶6In view of the aforesaid submission made by the counsel for the plaintiff, the Registry is directed to issue a certificate in favour of the plaintiff for refund of 50% of the court fees, as per law.

File be consigned to the record room.

(HIMA KOHLI) SEPTEMBER 07, 2015

JUDGE mk

19. * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(OS) 516/2015 & IA No.3929/2015 Decided on 07.09.2015 IN THE MATTER OF: REMI PROCESS PLANT & MACHINERY LTD. ..... Plaintiff Through : Mr. Debarshi B., Advocate Versus M/S FERNAS CONSTRUCTION LTD. ..... Defendant Through : Mr.Sanjeev Srivastava, Advocate CORAM HON'BLE MS.JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI