The Supreme Court in the High Court of Judicature at Madras, Rep. by its Registrar General Versus M.C. Subramaniam & Ors., dated 17.02.21 held that “thus, in our view, the High Court was correct in holding that Section 89 of the CPC and Section 69A of the 1955 Act be interpreted liberally. In view of this broad purposive construction, we affirm the High Court’s conclusion, and hold that Section 89 of CPC shall cover, and the benefit of Section 69Aof the 1955 Act shall also extend to, all methods of out of court dispute settlement between parties that the Court subsequently finds to have been legally arrived at. This would, thus, cover the present controversy, wherein a private settlement was arrived at, and a memo to withdraw the appeal was filed before the High Court. In such a case as well, the appellant, i.e., Respondent No. 1 herein would be entitled to refund of court fee.