M/S Ketan Construction Co Panipat v. M/S Mehta Construct Co. Karnal

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CM-55-RFCOM-2024 in/and RFA-COM-10-2018 (O&M) Decided on :07.08.2025 M/S KETAN CONSTRUCTION CO PANIPAT . .Appellant

Versus

M/S MEHTA CONSTRUCT CO. KARNAL . . . Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS SURI PRESENT: Mr. Rajinder Goel, Advocate and Mr. Purusharth Dhull, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. Sumit Gupta, Advocate for the respondent. **** HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI , J. (Oral) CM-55-RFCOM-2024 Payer in the present application is for deciding the main appeal i.e. RFA-COM-10-2018 in view of the written compromise deed dated 07.09.2024 (Annexure C-1).

In view of the averments mentioned and prayer made in the application, same is allowed and main case i.e. RFA-COM-10-2018 is taken up for consideration.

RFA-COM-10-2018 1.

Learned counsel for both the parties are ad-idem to the fact that the in view of the compromise deed dated 07.09.2024 (Annexure C-1), both the parties have entered into the compromise and settled their disputes amicably.

2.

Learned counsel for both the parties submits that keeping in view of the compromise deed dated 07.09.2024 (Annexure C-1), the present RIYA 2025.08.11 16:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CM-41-FCARB-2025 in/and FAO-CARB-42-2019 (O&M) -2appeal may kindly be disposed of having been not pressed any further. 3.

Ordered accordingly.

4.

At this stage, learned counsel for the appellant while placing reliance upon the judgment passed by Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in High Court of Judicature at Madras represented by its Registrar General v. M. C. Subramaniam and others, (2021) 3 SCC 560 and Rajiv Kumar and Others v. Amrit Varsha and others, 2022 (4) PLR 262 submits that since the dispute between the parties has been settled amicably, appellant is entitled for the refund of Court fees paid by him.

5.

Keeping in view the settled principle of law, as noticed herein before, appellant is at liberty to file an appropriate application seeking refund of Court fees before the appropriate Forum in accordance with law. 6.

Pending civil miscellaneous application, if any, stands disposed of.

(HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI) JUDGE ( VIKAS SURI ) JUDGE 07.08.2025 Riya Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether Reportable:

Yes/No RIYA 2025.08.11 16:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document