C.R. No. 4974 of 2009 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.R. No. 4974 of 2009 (O&M) Date of decision : 5.2.2010 ... Sadhu Ram and another ................Petitioners vs. Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division) (Lok Adalat), Kaithal and others .................Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice K.C. Puri Present: Sh. Arvind Bansal, Advocate for the petitioners Sh. Himanshu Raj, Assistant Advocate General, Haryana. ... K.C. Puri, J. (Oral) The only question raised before this Court is whether the Court fee should be refunded if the matter has been taken in Lok Adalat. The trial Court has distinguished the authority reported as Vallabh Das Gupta and others vs. Geeta Bai 2004 (4) RCR (Civil) 85, on the ground that compromise in that case was in the appeal. Section 21(1) ) of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 envisages as under:- “21(1)Award of Lok Adalat.- (1) Every award of the C.R. No. 4974 of 2009 -2- Lok Adalat shall be deemed to be a decree of a civil court or, as the case may be, an order of any other court and where a compromise or settlement has been arrived at, by a Lok Adalat in a case referred to it under sub-section (1) of Section 20, the Court-Fee paid in such case shall be refunded in the manner provided under the Court-Fees Act, 1870.” In view of the mandate given in the Act, the trial Court has committed a grave error in not refunding the amount. The State counsel could not point out any contrary view. Consequently, the revision petition stands accepted and the impugned order stands set aside. The Court fee is ordered to be refunded to the plaintiff-petitioners. ( K.C. Puri ) 5.2.2010 Judge chugh