Facts
The respondents sued to recover a security deposit in Com.O.S. No. 504/2024.
Source reference: pp. 4–6The Commercial Court partly decreed the suit for ₹40 lakh with interest and dismissed the appellant’s counterclaim.
Source reference: pp. 4–6The respondents had also obtained a partial decree in a separate suit, Com.O.S. No. 1713/2024, concerning GST amounts.
Source reference: pp. 4–6The appellant appealed against the decree and dismissal of the counterclaim.
Source reference: pp. 4–6During 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. 4–6The appellant had deposited the further ₹40 lakh pursuant to an interim order.
Source reference: pp. 4–6Issues
1. Whether the parties’ compromise could be accepted and the appeals disposed of in its terms
Source reference: pp. 4–72. Whether the deposited ₹40 lakh should be released to the respondents and the appellant granted a refund of court fees
Source reference: p. 7Law 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, 4–7Section 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, 4–7The Court also directed refund of court fees in accordance with the relevant rules; it cited no precedent.
Source reference: pp. 2–3, 4–7Reasoning
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. 4–7The 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. 4–7In 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. 4–7Holding
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. 7The appellant is entitled to a refund of court fees in accordance with the relevant rules.
Source reference: p. 7Acts & Sections Cited
1 provisions across 1 statute referred to in this judgment. Each provision opens on LawLens.
Commercial Courts Act, 20151
Original Court PDF
SRI. K V RANJITH KUMARvsSMT. JAMUNA K N
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in
