Dismissed¶¶20

Boston Scientific International B.V. & Anr. v. Mr. Vinod Ratra

Delhi HC6 Jan 2026CS(COMM)/1028/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Refund of full court fee after mediation settlement; Section 16 Court Fees Act 1870; Section 89 Code of Civil Procedure 1908; suit and counter-claim dismissed as withdrawn; Boston Scientific International B.V. & Anr. v. Vinod Ratra; CS(COMM) 1028/2018; CC(COMM) 11/2019; Delhi High Court Mediation and Conciliation Centre; Settlement Agreement 12.12.2025; Delhi High Court.

What did the court decide?

Registry directed to issue certificate to the plaintiffs and to the defendant/counterclaimant for refund of the full amount of court fee paid on the plaint and the counter-claim, respectively; suit and counter-claim dismissed as withdrawn. ¶¶20

Boston Scientific International B.V. & Anr. Vs Mr. Vinod Ratra — Delhi HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

$~1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- CS(COMM) 1028/2018 & CC(COMM) 11/2019

¶4

BOSTON SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL B.V. & ANR...Plaintiffs Through: Mr. Rohit Mahajan, Adv.

¶5

versus

¶6

MR. VINOD RATRA .....Defendant Through: Mr. Simarpal Singh Sawhney, Adv.

¶7

CORAM:

¶8

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS MAHAJAN

¶9

O R D E R

¶10

% 06.01.2026

¶11

The present suit has been filed praying for money decree. The defendant also made a counter-claim by filing its written statement which has been registered as CC(COMM) 11/2019.

¶12

During pendency of proceedings, the parties were referred to the mediation under the aegis of Delhi High Court Mediation and Conciliation Centre [in short >Centre?], where the parties are stated to have arrived at a settlement, terms whereof have been reduced in writing in the form of Settlement Agreement dated 12.12.2025. A copy of the said settlement agreement has been received from the Centre, and the same is taken on record.

¶13

A perusal of the Settlement Agreement dated 12.12.2025 shows that the same bears signatures of the plaintiffs, as well as, the defendant/counterclaimant. The parties shall remain bound by the terms recorded in the Settlement Agreement.

¶14

This is a digitally signed order.

¶15

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 09/01/2026 at 11:28:23

¶16

In view of the settlement, Mr. Rohit Mahajan, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the plaintiffs seeks to withdraw the present suit. Likewise, the defendant also seeks to withdraw his counter-claim.

¶17

The suit, as well as, counter-claim are dismissed as withdrawn.

¶18

At this stage, learned counsels appearing on behalf of the parties pray for refund of the court fee affixed by them on the plaint, as well as, on the counter-claim.

¶19

Having regard to the fact that the parties to the suit have arrived at a settlement through mediation, which is one of the mode of settlement of disputes referred to in Section 89 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, this Court is of the view that the parties are entitled to refund of full amount of court fee in terms of Section 16 of the Court Fees Act, 1870.

¶20

Accordingly, the Registry is directed to issue a certificate to the plaintiffs, as well as, the defendant/counter-claimant with regard to the refund of full amount of court fee paid by them on their plaint and counterclaim, respectively.

¶21

VIKAS MAHAJAN, J

¶22

JANUARY 6, 2026 aj

¶23

This is a digitally signed order.

¶24

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 09/01/2026 at 11:28:23

Boston Scientific International B.V. & Anr. v. Mr. Vinod Ratra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Boston Scientific International B.V. & Anr. v. Mr. Vinod Ratra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Nokia Technologies Oy Vs Hisense Group Holdings Co. Ltd. & Anr.

Loreal India Private Limited Vs Henkel Adhesives Technologies India Pvt. Ltd.

Hariharan Subramaniam Sole Proprietor of Subramaniam & Associates Vs S and a Law Offices & Ors.

Roseland Buildtech Pvt. Ltd. Vs Vihaan 43 Reality Pvt. Ltd. Earlier Known as Kunjbihari Developers Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.

Hero Investcorp Private Limited & Anr. Vs Gunwal Sports

Moti Mahal Delux Management Services Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. Vs M/S Universal Corporation & Anr.

Mankind Pharma Limited Vs Passiflora Pharmaceuticals

Mothercare Global Brand Limited Vs Rouf Shah Kawosa Trading as Mothercares Store Momscare Store

Krishan Chand Sharma Vs Delhi Development Authority & Ors.

Ideal Hotels and Industries Limited Vs Bhagyauday Investments Private Limited & Ors.

M/S R.K. Jain and Sons Hospitality Services(P) Ltd. Vs New Delhi Municipal Council

M/S R. K. Associates and Hoteliers Pvt. Ltd, Vs Indian Railway Catering and Tourism Corporation Limited (Irctc)

Sonu Halder Vs State NCT of Delhi

M/S Consolidated Construction Consortium Ltd. Vs M/S Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Ltd.