1 abs IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION SUMMARY SUIT NO. 3194 OF 1987 Bhagwan Deepchand Golani .. Plaintiff V/s Maharashtra Book Mfg. Co. Ltd. & Anr. .. Defendants Mr.M.K. Mudnaney for the plaintiff. Mr.J.S. Shah for the defendants. CORAM : D.G. KARNIK, J. DATE : 15TH JUNE 2009 P.C. : 1. Learned counsel for the plaintiff states that thee plaintiff does not want to proceed with the suit against the defendant nos.2 and 3. The suit against the defendant nos.2 and 3 is dismissed without any order as to costs. 2. Counsel for the plaintiff and the defendant no.1 tender minutes of order signed by them. Minutes are taken on record and marked "X" for identification. There shall be order in terms of the minutes except the bracketed portion, i.e. except para 6 of the minutes of the order which is regarding refund of court fees. 2 3. Government Notification dated 1st October 1959 makes a provision for refund of the court fees. A bare look at the notification shows that clause 1 of it applies to summary suits and clauses 2 to 6 apply to the suits other than summary suits. In my view clauses 2 to 6 do not apply in respect of the summary suits. In respect of summary suits, the court fee refund is permissible when leave to defend is refused. Here it does not appear to be so. Conditional leave was granted to the defendant no.1, in pursuance of which he has deposited Rs.25,000/- in the court. In the circumstances, the matter is not covered by clause 1 of the Government Notification. The plaintiff is therefore not entitled to refund of court fees. (D.G. KARNIK, J.)