Debts Recovery Tribunal disposed of an OA filed by Punjab National Bank for withdrawal. The court declined the prayer for refund of court fees because the settlement occurred amicably outside arbitration, conciliation, judicial settlement, Lok Adalat, or mediation.
Withdrawal of OA allowed; prayer for refund of court fees declined.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Debts Recovery Tribuna!-Il, Delhi o[l79l2024 PUI{JAB NATIONAL BANKVS SOHAIL AHMED AND OTHERS
2s.04.2025
Item no. 13
Present: Shri Satish Kashyap, counsel for applicant along with Sh. K.C. Roy, Liaison Officer for the bank.
Matter is taken through Video Conferencing/ Hybrid Mode.
IA no.814/2025 has been filed by the applicant bank for withdrawal of the present OA.
The Ld. Counsel for the applicant bank submits that the defendants approached the applicant bank for amicable settlement and paid the amount of Rs.28,16,338/- to settle the entire liability. It is further submitted that the proposal of the defendants was accepted by the applicant bank and defendants paid the entire settlement amount. If is further submitted that nothing remaining to be recovered in the present OA. Therefore, the applicant bank wishes to withdraw the present OA.
The Ld. Counsel of the applicant has also requested for refund of the court fees. It is submitted that the settlement amount has already been paid by the defendants to the applicant bank and nothing remains to be recovered against the defendants in the present OA and therefore, the court fees may be refunded as per provisions conbined in the rules. In this regard the Hontle Supreme Court has passed the order in SLP(c) No(s).723/2023 datd 28.01.2025 titld as Jage Ram Vs Vd Kaur & Ors. The Honble Supreme Court has considered the matter and has held that:
<A
Para 6- The refund of court fes s permissble only if, the matter is referrd to Arbitratio4 Concihhtion, judtlcial settlement, including through Lok Adalat or medtiation for stflement and the case is dsrdd in terms of such a settlement and not otherwis.
Para 7- In the case at han4 the settlement in terms of which the wond appal was duidd by the High Court is not on reference to any of the above authorities/fora rather it was an amicable *ttlement out of the court
Para 8- Accordingly, we are of the opinbn that the petitioner is not entitld to refund of the court fes and the High @uft has not committd any error or illqality in refusing such aprayer."
In view of the above, OAl79l2O24 is dismissed as withdrawn. The applicant bank has also soughtrefund of couft fee. The matter has not beendisposed ofon the basis of settlement in Lok Adalat. There appearsno occasion to return the couft fee. The matterhas been withdrawn due to the settlement amount hasalready been paid by the defendants to the applicantbank. Therefore, theprayer of the applicantfor refund of couft fees is hereby declined.All the pending IAs stand disposed of. IA no.8L4l2O25is disposedoff accordingly.
File be consigned to record room.
Date already fixed on 21.O8.2O25 before this Tribunal stands cancelled.
q)..
(susHrL KUMAn RASTOGI) PRESIDING OFFICER ,RT-II, Delhi
,
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Jage RamVs Sd Kaur & Ors.Referred¶8
SLP(c) No(s).723/2023 dated 28.01.2025 titled Jage Ram Vs Sd Kaur & Ors.
PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK
SOHAIL AHMED AND OTHERS
SUSHIL KUMAR RASTOGI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
