Court fee refund turns on settlement without judicial intervention, whether reached privately or through Section 89 CPC.

A refund of the entire court fee is available where a dispute is settled out of court and the lis ends without judicial intervention. The distinction between a settlement reached directly by the parties and one reached through Section 89 CPC was rejected for refund purposes under Section 16 of the Court Fees Act, 1870. The operative test is whether the dispute was resolved without the court deciding the merits, not the route by which settlement occurred. On that basis, a private compromise can qualify for refund in the same way as a court-referred settlement.

---

---

Issues: Whether full court fee paid in the second appeal was refundable when the dispute was settled out of court without invocation of Section 89 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

Analysis: The Court held that the material consideration is whether the dispute was resolved without judicial intervention. It reasoned that a settlement reached directly between the parties, as well as a settlement reached through the mechanism of Section 89 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, both result in resolution of the lis without the Court's intervention. On that basis, the distinction suggested by the State between a settlement under Section 89 and a private settlement was rejected for the purpose of refund under Section 16 of the Court Fees Act, 1870.

Conclusion: The applicants were entitled to refund of the entire court fee paid in the second appeal.

---