Karnataka High Court
Civil Procedure and EvidenceCommercial and Corporate Law

Commercial appeals are disposed of in terms of compromise, with the deposited settlement amount released to the respondents.

SRI. K V RANJITH KUMAR vs SMT. JAMUNA K N

Karnataka High CourtJUDGMENT: September 25, 20262 MIN READSOURCE JUDGMENT
Commercial appeals are disposed of in terms of compromise, with the deposited settlement amount released to the respondents.. SRI. K V RANJITH KUMAR vs SMT. JAMUNA K N. Karnataka High Court. LawLens
THE ORIGINAL LAWLENS SUMMARY
01

Facts

The respondents sued to recover a security deposit in Com.O.S. No. 504/2024.

Source reference: pp. 4–6

The Commercial Court partly decreed the suit for ₹40 lakh with interest and dismissed the appellant’s counterclaim.

Source reference: pp. 4–6

The respondents had also obtained a partial decree in a separate suit, Com.O.S. No. 1713/2024, concerning GST amounts.

Source reference: pp. 4–6

The appellant appealed against the decree and dismissal of the counterclaim.

Source reference: pp. 4–6

During the appeals, the parties filed a compromise petition under Order XXIII Rule 3 CPC, agreeing to settle all claims in both suits for ₹40 lakh in addition to ₹60 lakh already paid.

Source reference: pp. 4–6

The appellant had deposited the further ₹40 lakh pursuant to an interim order.

Source reference: pp. 4–6
02

Issues

1. Whether the parties’ compromise could be accepted and the appeals disposed of in its terms

Source reference: pp. 4–7

2. Whether the deposited ₹40 lakh should be released to the respondents and the appellant granted a refund of court fees

Source reference: p. 7
03

Law Applied

Order XXIII Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, permits a court to record a lawful compromise in writing and signed by the parties and to pass a decree in accordance with it.

Source reference: pp. 2–3, 4–7

Section 13(1-A) of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015, provides for appeals from specified judgments and orders of Commercial Courts.

Source reference: pp. 2–3, 4–7

The Court also directed refund of court fees in accordance with the relevant rules; it cited no precedent.

Source reference: pp. 2–3, 4–7
04

Reasoning

The parties appeared before the Court, were identified by counsel, and confirmed that they had entered into the compromise voluntarily, without coercion, undue influence or misrepresentation.

Source reference: pp. 4–7

The agreed payment settled the claims in both suits, with the deposited ₹40 lakh forming the balance of the settlement after the earlier ₹60 lakh payment.

Source reference: pp. 4–7

In light of the parties’ consent and the stated finality of the settlement, the Court accepted the compromise, directed release of the deposit to respondent No. 2, and ordered the court-fee refund subject to the applicable rules.

Source reference: pp. 4–7
05

Holding

The Court disposed of both appeals in terms of the compromise.

It directed that ₹40 lakh, together with any interest accrued, be transmitted to respondent No. 2 upon submission of bank details; the parties have no further claims against each other.

Source reference: p. 7

The appellant is entitled to a refund of court fees in accordance with the relevant rules.

Source reference: p. 7
06

Acts & Sections Cited

1 provisions across 1 statute referred to in this judgment. Each provision opens on LawLens.

Commercial Courts Act, 20151

Karnataka High Court

Original Court PDF

SRI. K V RANJITH KUMARvsSMT. JAMUNA K N

Karnataka High Court · September 25, 2026

Click to open original judgment

Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in

Click to open original judgment