Allowed

Hdfc Bank Limited v. Rajesh Kumar

DRT22 Aug 2025OA/558/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The applicant bank sought to withdraw an application order quashing recovery proceedings after settling and paying the loan account. The court discussed Supreme Court principles on court fee refunds, holding refunds are only permissible for settlements via specified authorities. Consequently, the fee refund prayer was declined, the withdrawal application allowed, and the original order dismissed.

What did the court decide?

The prayer for refund of court fees is declined. Application for withdrawal of OA is allowed. OA dismissed as withdrawn.

Hdfc Bank Limited versus Rajesh Kumar — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

Debts Recovery Tribunal-Il, Delhi

¶2

oA/5s8/202s HDFC BANK LIMITED Vs RA]ESH KUMAR

¶3

22.08.2025

¶4

Item no. 5

¶5

Present: Ms. Purnima, counsel for applicant bank.

¶6

Matter is taken through Video Conferencing/ hybrid Mode.

¶7

IA no.209Ll2025 has been filed by the applicant bank for withdrawal of the present OA.

¶8

The Ld. Counsel for the applicant bank submits that it is submitted that the loan account bearing No. 141457696 have been settled between the parties for a sum of Rs. 8,53,000.00 and the same has been fully paid by the Defendant to the applicant Bank. She further submits that she wish to withdraw the^present OA.

¶9

The Ld. Counsel of the applicant bank has also requested for refund of the court fees. It is submitted that the matter has been settled and therefore, the court fees may be refunded as^per provisions contained in the rules. In this regard the Honble Supreme Court has^passed the order in SLP(c) No(s).723/2023 datd 28.01.2025 titld as Jage Ram Vs Vd l@ur & Ors. The Hontle Supreme Court has considered the matter and has held that:

¶10

Para 6- The refund of ourt fes is^permissible only if, the matter is referd to Arbitration, Conciliation, judicial ttlement, including through Lok Adalat or mdiation for sttlement and the cas is didd in terms of such a sttlement and not otherwie.

¶11

Para 7- In the ase at hanL the sttlement in terms of which the wond appeal was dsidd by the High Court is not on reference to any of the above authorities/fora rather it was an amicable settlement outof the auft. 'q;'

¶12

Para 8- Arcordingly, we are of the opinion that the petitioner is not entitld to refund of the court fes and the High @uft has not committed any error or illqality in refusing such a prayer.

¶13

In view of the above, it is clear that if the matter has been settled out of the court without any reference from the court or Tribunal, the court fees cannot be refunded. Therefore, the prayer of the applicant bank for refund of murt fees is hereby declined. IA no.2091 12025 is allowed. OA 558/2025 is dismissed as withdrawn. Allthe pending IAs stand disposed of.

¶14

File be consigned to record room.

¶15

--.s) (SUSHIL KUMnn RASTOGI) PRESIDING OFFICER, DRT-II, Delhi

Hdfc Bank Limited v. Rajesh Kumar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hdfc Bank Limited v. Rajesh Kumar

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