Court Fees – Refund – Compromise and Settlement – Writ petition challenging refusal to refund court fee after settlement of suit – Petitioner-plaintiff filed for possession by specific performance and permanent injunction – Suit dismissed as withdrawn based on compromise – Application for refund of court fee dismissed by lower court – Held, Section 16 of the Court Fees Act mandates refund upon settlement – Lower court's failure to order refund at dismissal stage erroneous – Refund of court fee ordered. [Paras 1-13]

Legislative Intent – Encouragement of Settlements – Held – Section 16 of the Court Fees Act and Section 21(1) of the Legal Services Authority Act aim to encourage dispute settlements – Provisions mandate refund of court fees upon case settlement – Legislative intent is twofold: settle disputes and refund court fees paid by plaintiffs. [Para 10]

Procedural Requirement – Mandatory Language – Held – The term 'shall' in Section 16 denotes mandatory duty on courts to order refund of court fees upon settlement – Even if not ordered at the time of settlement, subsequent applications must be granted – Lower court's dismissal of refund application without such consideration wrong. [Paras 11-12]

Decision – Petition Allowed – Lower court's order set aside – Petitioner-plaintiff entitled to refund of court fee paid at suit's institution – Direction for refund issued. [Para 13]

Landlord-Tenant Law – Bona Fide Necessity – Section 13 of Haryana Urban (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1973 – Landlord's prerogative to determine suitability of premises – Tenant cannot dictate how landlord satisfies his need – Petition for ejection on personal necessity presumed genuine – Orders of eviction upheld – Petition dismissed. [Para 9]

Revisional Jurisdiction – Limited Scope – Findings of fact by lower authorities unless perverse or opposed to evidence not interfered with in revisional jurisdiction – High Court's role confined to ensuring findings are according to law and not erroneous – Concurrent findings of bona fide necessity by Rent Controller and Appellate Authority upheld – Petition dismissed. [Para 11]

Decision – Orders of Eviction Upheld – Both Rent Controller and Appellate Authority correctly found landlord's need bona fide – No perversity or error in findings – Revision petition dismissed. [Para 11]

Civil Procedure Code, 1908 – Order IX Rule 13 – Setting aside ex parte decree – Proper service of summons – Conditions under Order V Rule 15 CPC – Appellant’s claim of not being duly served – Mental trauma and depression – Trial court’s dismissal of application – Appeal challenging trial court’s decision – Court examines the evidence and arguments – Appellant’s contention regarding the address provided by respondent – Trial court’s finding of proper service – Satisfaction of conditions under Order V Rule 15 CPC – Grounds for setting aside ex parte decree – Lack of evidence supporting appellant’s claim – Trial court’s justified decision to proceed ex parte – Appeal dismissed. (Para numbers 1-19)

Motor Accident Claim – Appellant’s appeal against the judgment and award of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal – Appellant seeks enhancement of compensation – Appellant sustained severe injuries in a motor accident caused by rash and negligent driving – Appellant’s income claimed at Rs. 4000/- per month – Dispute regarding the assessment of compensation and income – Court finds that the Tribunal incorrectly assessed the appellant’s income as a housewife at Rs. 3000/- per month, instead accepting her claim of Rs. 4000/- per month – Court acknowledges the invaluable contribution of a housewife and cites a Supreme Court case supporting this view – Court also determines enhanced compensation for pain, suffering, and future prospects – Appellant awarded an additional sum of Rs. 2,14,000/- with 6% per annum interest from the date of the claim application. [Para 9-14]

Hindu Law – Succession – Legitimacy of Children – Writ petition by widow and daughters of a deceased employee claiming retiral benefits – Marriage of appellant No.1 during subsistence of first marriage – Marriage void – Daughters born out of void marriage deemed legitimate for succession – Appeal allowed to the extent daughters entitled to father's estate and retiral benefits. [Paras 1-23]

Void Marriage – Rights of Children – Held – Appellant No.1 cannot claim as legally wedded wife due to subsistence of first marriage – Appellants No.2 and 3, daughters born out of void marriage, are legitimate for succession purposes – Entitled to estate and retiral benefits of deceased father. [Para 17]

Judicial Precedents – Legitimacy under Hindu Succession Act – Held – Children of void marriages are legitimate under Section 16 of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, for inheritance – Daughters' entitlement to retiral benefits and estate upheld – Decisions in Rameshwari Devi and Vidyadhari cases followed. [Para 16]

Decision – Appeal Allowed – Daughters' entitlement to retiral benefits and estate affirmed – Service benefits directed to be released with arrears and family pension from father's death date – Order to be complied within two months. [Paras 19-25]

Service Law – Recovery of Excess Payment – No Fraud or Mistake by Employee – Appeal against quashing of recovery order – Respondent received excess increment for 20 years due to employer's mistake – No allegation of fraud or mistake by respondent – Inequitable to recover after retirement or near retirement – Recovery orders set aside – Appeal dismissed. [Para 31-32]

Employee's Innocence – Analysis – Respondent had no role in pay fixation or excess payment – Excess payment received for nearly 20 years without any fault of respondent – Recovery at retirement considered harsh and inequitable – Judgment of Single Judge upheld. [Para 31-35]

Decision – Appeal Dismissed – Findings of Single Judge affirmed – Excess recovery deemed inequitable and arbitrary – No error in quashing recovery order – Appeal dismissed. [Para 40-41]

Criminal Law – Conviction Appeal – FIR Delay – Appeal against conviction under Section 397 IPC – Incident on 23.04.1996 – FIR registered on 18.05.1996 – 25 days delay in FIR registration – Place of occurrence on busy road in thickly populated area – Complainant admitted lodging complaint on occurrence date, but no complaint exhibited – Prosecution failed to explain delay in FIR registration – Conviction unsustainable – Appellants acquitted. [Paras 1-8]

Identification Parade – Test Identification – Held – Complainant saw accused before FIR registration – Accused refused identification parade after FIR registration – Accused not produced in muffled faces – Prosecution obliged to conduct TIP at first opportunity – Identification in court without TIP unreliable – Conviction unsustainable. [Para 11]

Evidence – Recovery of Stolen Property – Held – Prosecution failed to join private witnesses during recovery – Recovery from accused’s house doubtful – No private witnesses joined during recovery – Conviction based on recovery and disclosure statement not sustainable. [Para 14]

Decision – Appeals Allowed – Convictions Set Aside – Convictions and sentences under Section 397 IPC set aside – Appellants acquitted – Appellants to be released if not required in any other case – Bail bonds discharged. [Paras 15-18]

Land Acquisition - Re-determination of Compensation - Requirement of Certified Copy of Award - Civil Writ Petition against rejection of application under Section 28-A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 - Petitioner's application dismissed solely for not attaching certified copy of award - High Court finds no legal mandate requiring attachment of certified copy for re-determination of compensation - Held, the Land Acquisition Collector erred in law - Application to be reconsidered without such requirement.

Writ Petition Allowed. [Paras 1-12]

Requirement of Certified Copy - Legal Interpretation - Analysis - Held - From plain reading of Section 28-A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, there is no stipulation for attaching a certified copy of the award for re-determination of compensation - The entire acquisition record already with the Land Acquisition Collector makes such a requirement redundant - No substantial reasoning provided for considering the application time-barred - Submission of being time-barred rejected as it was not a ground in the original impugned order. [Para 7-9]

Decision - Quashing of Impugned Order - Court quashes the impugned order of the Land Acquisition Collector, directing a fresh decision on the application filed under Section 28-A of the Act within six months, with costs awarded to the petitioner. [Para 11-12]

Contract Law - Enforcement of Employment Terms – Regular Second Appeal against the dismissal of suit for recovery of damages and salary – Appellant, employed as Program Instructor, claimed unpaid salary and damages after the closure of the center – Agreement lacked explicit clause for salary payment by the respondent – Civil suit dismissed for absence of enforceable contractual obligation – Held that terms of contract must be explicit and cannot be presumed.

Recovery of Salary and Damages - Contractual Obligations – Analysis – Held – The court emphasized that no presumptions can be made beyond the written terms of a contract. The appellant failed to prove that the respondent was contractually obligated to pay her salary after the closure of the center. The suit was dismissed based on the clear terms of the contract. [Para 8-9]

Decision – Dismissal of Second Appeal – The court dismissed the second appeal, reinforcing the principle that contractual obligations must be explicitly stated and proven. The absence of any salary payment clause in the agreement led to the dismissal of the appellant’s claims. [Para 10]