- Home
- /
- News Updates
- /
- Plaintiff Is Not Entitled To Return...
Plaintiff Is Not Entitled To Return Of Court Fees When The Parties Are Referred To Arbitration Under Section 8 Of The A&C Act: Delhi High Court
Ausaf Ayyub
26 May 2022 3:55 PM GMT
The High Court of Delhi has held that the plaintiff is not entitled to return of Court Fess when the parties are referred to arbitration under Section 8 of the A&C Act. The Single Bench of Justice Amit Bansal held that the benefit of Section 16[1] of the Court Fees Act would only be available to the plaintiff when the parties are referred to arbitration for settlement in terms...
The High Court of Delhi has held that the plaintiff is not entitled to return of Court Fess when the parties are referred to arbitration under Section 8 of the A&C Act.
The Single Bench of Justice Amit Bansal held that the benefit of Section 16[1] of the Court Fees Act would only be available to the plaintiff when the parties are referred to arbitration for settlement in terms of Section 89 of the CPC and not under Section 8 of the A&C Act.
The plaintiff contented that as the application filed by the defendant under Section 8 of the A&C Act is allowed, it is entitled to refund of Court Fees in terms of Section 16 of the Courts Fees Act, 1870.
The Plaintiff relied on the decision of the Court in RV Solutions Pvt. Ltd. v. Ajay Kumar CS(COMM) 745/2017 to contend that the Court is bound to refund the Courts Fess when the matter is referred to arbitration.
The Court rejected the argument of the plaintiff that it is entitled to the refund of the Courts Fees. The Court held that the in terms of Section 16 of the Courts Fees Act, the fees is only returnable when the parties are referred to arbitration for settlement under Section 89 of the CPC.
The Court held that the plaintiff cannot be entitled to refund of court fees when it has wrongly filed the civil suit when it should have actually invoked the arbitration clause.
The Court held that the reliance on the decision of the Court in RV Solutions (supra) is misplaced as the direction given in that case was not a dicta and but a merely a passing direction.
Case Title: A-One Realtors Pvt. Ltd. v. Energy Efficiency Services Ltd.
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 502
Date: 23.05.2022
Counsel for the Plaintiff: Ms. Mahima Ahuja, Advocate.
Counsel for the Defendant: Mr. Samdarshi Sanjay, Advocate.
[1] Section16. Refund of fee. —Where the Court refers the parties to the suit to any one of the mode of settlement of dispute referred to in section 89 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908), the plaintiff shall be entitled to a certificate from the Court authorising him to receive back from the collector, the full amount of the fee paid in respect of such plaint.
