C.R.Polymers Vs Pon Singh — Madras HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

C.R.Polymers Vs Pon Singh — Madras HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Appeal dismissed as withdrawn pursuant to out-of-court settlement recorded in memo dated 09.09.2025; Registry directed to refund the Court fee to the appellant under Section 69-A of the Tamil Nadu Court-Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1955 read with M.C.Subramaniam (2021) 3 SCC 560, subject only to standard/applicable statutory deductions, by instrument drawn in the appellant's name, within twelve weeks i.e., on or before 04.12.2025, subject to procedural compliance; no order as to costs.

Issue for consideration

Whether the captioned appeal, having been settled out of Court as between the parties, should be dismissed as withdrawn. +1 more

Court's answer

The captioned appeal is dismissed as withdrawn, the same having been settled out of Court between the parties.

Ratio / Principle

In the light of Section 69-A of the TN Court Fees Act read with the M.C.Subramaniam decision, the Registry is to refund the Court fee to the appellant subject only to standard/applicable statutory deductions, by way of an instrument drawn in the name of the appellant, completing the refund as expeditiously as the business of Registry permits but in any event within twelve weeks, i.e., on or before 04.12.2025, subject to counsel for the appellant complying with procedural requirements.

Key takeaways

There shall be no order as to costs.ratio¶32

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

C.R.Polymers v. Pon Singh (Madras High Court, Appeal (CAD) No.17 of 2025, decided 11.09.2025; bench M.Sundar and Mummineni Sudheer Kumar, JJ.; order by M.Sundar, J.) - Appeal under Section 13(1A) of the Commercial Courts Act read with Section 96 CPC against the judgment and decree dated 11.11.2024 of the Commercial Judge, Egmore in COS No.56 of 2023. Counsel for both sides jointly submitted that the matter stood settled out of Court (memo dated 09.09.2025). Held: appeal dismissed as withdrawn; in the light of Section 69-A of the Tamil Nadu Court-Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1955 (Tamil Nadu Act XIV of 1955) read with High Court of Judicature at Madras v. M.C.Subramaniam, 2021 SCC OnLine SC 109 : (2021) 3 SCC 560, Registry to refund the Court fee to the appellant subject only to standard/applicable statutory deductions, by an instrument drawn in the appellant's name, within twelve weeks i.e., on or before 04.12.2025, subject to procedural compliance; no order as to costs.

Appeal (CAD) No.17 of 2025

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED :11.09.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.SUNDAR and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MUMMINENI SUDHEER KUMAR

Appeal (CAD) No.17 of 2025

C.R.Polymers Rep. by its Proprietor Mr.Chainroop Hirawat Carrying on Business at No.7 7th Block, Tamil Nadu Housing Board Industrial Estate, Phase - II Kodungaiyur, Chennai - 600 118 ... Appellant

Vs.

Mr.Pon Singh Proprietor Sabarivasan Hardware Store Carrying on business at No.881/7, 8 & 9 Thiruvalluvar High Road Gopal Nagar, Padi Chennai - 600 098 ... Respondent

Appeal filed under Section 13(1A) of Commercial Courts Act read with Section 96 of Civil Procedure Code, 1908 to set aside the decree and judgment by the Commercial Judge, Egmore dated 11.11.2024 in COS No.56 of 2023.

Page Nos.1/6

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Appeal (CAD) No.17 of 2025

For Appellant : Mr.K.P.Dinesh For Respondent : Mr.J.Shakul Hameed for Mr.C.Prabakaran

ORDER

[Order of the Court was made by M.SUNDAR, J. ]

Mr.K.P.Dinesh, learned counsel on record for the sole appellant and Mr.J.Shakul Hameed, learned counsel representing Mr.C.Prabakaran,

counsel on record for sole respondent are before us.

Both counsel submit in one voice in unison that the matter has been settled as between the parties i.e., settled out of Court. A scanned reproduction of the memo filed by the learned counsel for appellant in this regard (memo dated 09.09.2025) is as follows:

Page Nos.2/6

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Appeal (CAD) No.17 of 2025

Page Nos.3/6

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Appeal (CAD) No.17 of 2025

As regards the refund of Court fee, in the light of Section 69-A of

'The Tamil Nadu Court-Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1955 (Tamil Nadu Act

Page Nos.4/6

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Appeal (CAD) No.17 of 2025

XIV of 1955)' [hereinafter 'TN Court Fees Act' for convenience and clarity] read with M.C.Subramaniam case [ High Court of Judicature at Madras Vs. M.C.Subramaniam reported in 2021 SCC OnLine SC 109 : (2021) 3 SCC 560 ], Registry to refund the Court fee subject only to standard / applicable statutory deductions, if any. Refund shall be by way of an instrument drawn in the name of the appellant. Registry shall complete the process of refund of Court fee as expeditiously as the business of Registry permits but in any event within twelve weeks from today i.e., on or before 04.12.2025 (subject to counsel for appellant complying with procedural requirements).

Captioned appeal dismissed as withdrawn, the same having been settled out of Court with directive regarding refund of Court fee in the aforesaid manner. There shall be no order as to costs.

Index : Yes / No Neutral Citation : Yes / No gpa

Page Nos.5/6

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Appeal (CAD) No.17 of 2025

M.SUNDAR, J., and MUMMINENI SUDHEER KUMAR, J.,

gpa

To

The Commercial Court Egmore, Chennai

Appeal (CAD) No.17 of 2025

11.09.2025

Page Nos.6/6

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis