Allowed

Union Bank of India v. Kavita

DRT15 Dec 2023OA/402/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed the withdrawal of an Original Application by Union Bank of India after an out-of-court settlement with the respondent. Citing precedents, the court affirmed the bank's right to settle and withdraw.

What did the court decide?

Withdrawal of the Original Application (OA 402 of 2023) allowed; IA No. 3393/2023 allowed with directions for document return and court fee refund.

Union Bank of India versus Kavita — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2023)

¶1

OA 402 of 2023

¶2

15/12/2023	Ex. No. Before Presiding Officer Dr. Rekha G. Dhakar, DRT-1, Mumbai. *Roznama in OA 402 of 2023* *Union Bank of India Vs Kavita Badagu*	Next date
	Advocate Pradnya Bamne i/b M/s. N. N. Amin & Co. appeared for the Applicant. IA No. 3393/2023
	1. The Ld. Counsel appearing for the Applicant Bank seeking permission to withdraw the Original Application as they have settled the matter out of court with the defendants and received an amount of Rs.10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lacs Only) towards full and final settlement of entire OA claim of Rs. 23,62,953.29/-. 2. Considered the contentions of Ld. Counsel for the applicant and gone through the record as well as case laws on the subject. 3. The Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in the matter of Satish Chand Gupta & Ors. Vs. SBI-W.P © 2588/2010 held that “…..DRT can have no objection to the same as the bank which is claimant has agreed to the same. The bank is dominus litis and it is

¶3

¶4

OA 402 of 2023

¶5

for the bank to decide as to against which party it desires the litigation to continue. It is purely a contractual matter and the bank in its wisdom decided to settle the claim against the petitioners…..”. It was further laid down that the Tribunal appears to think that it is some kind of Ombudsman/ Auditor of the bank to scrutinize the settlement arrived between the parties. The Tribunal is no one to decide as to at what value the bank should settle its dues with the borrower especially when the bank has Managers who have acted in pursuance to authorization in their favour and after due consideration of the proposal of the petitioners….”. 4. In the light of above, since the account impugned has already been closed in terms of settlement between the parties and Bank has already received the entire settlement amount, further the bank has dominus litis in their matter, therefore, IA No. 3393/2023 is allowed and Original is as Application hereby disposed withdrawn.

¶6

¶7

OA 402 of 2023

¶8

The Registry of this Tribunal is hereby directed to return the complete documents of the OA to the authorized officer of the applicant bank before the Ld. Registrar on 30/12/2023 after obtaining necessary acknowledgment. However, the order sheets as well as the plaint and necessary documents shall be kept with this Tribunal. 6. The applicant is directed to follow the procedure of refund of court fees as per the DRT (Refund of Court fee) Rules 2013. File be closed and consigned to record room. P.O. DRT-I

¶9

Tjs/-6

¶10

Union Bank of India v. Kavita

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. Kavita

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Govinda Industries Private Limited versus State Bank of India

Idbi Bank versus Vickaash

Punjab National Bank versus M/S Ahp Technologies

Shri Tradco Deesan Pvt. Ltd. versus State Bank of India

Mrs Usha Narendra Vora versus Piramal Capital And Housing Finance Ltd.

Abdul Kayum Tamboli and Other versus Bank of India