Allowed

Mashreqbank Psc v. Shri Hari Singh Ranka

DRT20 Mar 2023OA/409/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed the withdrawal of an original application filed by Mashreq Bank PSC against Shri Hari Singh Ranka. The application was withdrawn as the bank had settled the matter out of court and received the full settlement amount, exercising its dominus litis status.

What did the court decide?

Original Application allowed as withdrawn; Registry directed to return documents to the bank; court fees refund procedure directed.

Mashreqbank Psc versus Shri Hari Singh Ranka — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2023)

¶1

20/03/2023	Ex. No.	Before Presiding Officer Dr. Rekha G. Dhakar, DRT-1, Mumbai. Roznama in OA 409 of 2022 *Mashreq Bank PSC Vs Shri Hari Singh Ranka*	Next date
		Advocate Mr. Ashish Kanojia i/b PRS Legal appeared for the applicant. Advocate Mr. Ashish Pyasi a/w Mr. Mukul Bhagtani i/b Dhir & Dhir Associates appeared for the respondent no. 1 and 2. IA No. 293/2023
		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.4,66,00,000/- (Rupees Four Crores Sixty Six Lacs Only) towards full and final settlement of entire OA claim of Rs. 649,96,19,359/-. 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.

¶2

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 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

¶3

dominus litis in their matter, therefore, IA
No. 293/2023 is allowed and Original
Application is hereby disposed as withdrawn.
5. 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 05/05/2023 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

Mashreqbank Psc v. Shri Hari Singh Ranka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mashreqbank Psc v. Shri Hari Singh Ranka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

State Bank of India versus Supreme Suyog Funicular Ropeways Pvt. Ltd.

Punjab National Bank versus M/S Saleem Qureshi and Sons

Hdfc Bank versus M/S R. S. Creations

Indian Overseas Bank versus Essar Power Gujarat Limited

Mrs Mohammadi Yakub Shaikh versus Punjab Sind Bank and Ors.

State Bank of India versus Suresh