Allowed

Bank of Baroda v. M/S Seagull Maritime Agencies Private Limited

DRT18 Jun 2025TA/1917/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Application filed by Bank of Baroda for withdrawal of a transfer application and refund of court fees after an OTS with the borrower. Bench allowed withdrawal but denied fee refund as settlement occurred out of court, not under statutory dispute resolution authority.

What did the court decide?

The Transfer Application is allowed as withdrawn. Registry directed to return original documents to the applicant. Prayer for refund of court fees is declined.

Bank of Baroda versus M/S Seagull Maritime Agencies Private… — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

Debts RecoverY^{Tribunal-Il, Delhi}

¶2

TAlL9L7l2022

¶3

BANK OF^{BARODAVS M/S SEAGULL MARTflME} AGEI{CIES PRIVATE UMITED

¶4

18.06.2025

¶5

Item no.36

¶6

Present:^{Mr. Amit Mahaliyan, Counselfor applicant bank} None for defendants

¶7

Matter is takeir^{through Mdeo Conferencing/Hybrid mode'}

¶8

IA no.1o51l2D25^{has been filed by the applicant bank for} withdrawal of the Present^TA.

¶9

TheLd.Counselfortheapplicantbanksubmitsthatthepresent original application,^{the defendants had approached the} apiticant Gnk^{for an One Time Settlement (OTS") for an} amount of^{Rs 4,60,00,000/- (Rupees Four CroresSixty} fnousana On$),^{and the same was agreedby the applicant} bank, vide OnJlme^{SetHement Letter dated 27'03'2025'ltlle} ippiit rt bank^{has received the entire said oTS amountof} nll+,so"Oop00/-,^{and a no due certificatehas also been issued} to the 'defendants and the original title deeds qua the mortgaged^{property has also been released' It is humbly} ruU.lti"O tfrlt^{iince the present matter now stands settled.It} isf,rrUfyprayedtothisHon'bleTribunaltoallowtheapplicant Ln[ to iu,o'ra^{the present Transfer Application.Ld. counsel} i"i ippfi..nt bank^{atso prayed for return of the original} documents.

¶10

The Ld. Counsel^{of the applicanthas also requested for} reruna of the court^{fees. It is submittedthat the matterhas} 5"ln settled^{and therefore,the court fees may be refunded-as} p"i pr*itlons contained^{in the rules. In this regardthe H-o1-t!e-} 5rpt"r" Court^{has passd the order in SLP(c) No(9'7232923} -a'itA ia.ot.il25 d'ild as Jage Ram vs ved Kaur & orc'The iontr" supreme^{c-ourt has considered the matter and has held} that

¶11

Para 6- The^{refund of ourt fes is permissible only} rt^{the matter is rcferrd to Arbitration,Conciliation,} iLaiciat^{*ttlement, inctudingthroughLok Adalat or} -mdiation br sttlement and the ase is decidd in terms of such^{a xttlementbnd not otherwise'}

¶12

Para 7- In^{the ase at han4 the settlementin terms} of which^{the wond appealwas decided by the High} Court is not^{on reference to any of the above} authoitia/fom^{ntfier it wa7 an amiable sexlement} out of thd ourt. g,\

¶13

Para 8-^{Accordingly,*, ui of the opinion that the} ptitnr", is not enttild^{to refund of the court fes} 'and the High Court has not committed any error or iltqality iirefusing^{such a prayer'"}

¶14

In view of the above,^{it is clear that if the matter has been} r*ifJ ort^{of lne court without any referencefrom the court or} iiirir."L-tt'"^{court fees cannot be refunded' Therefore' the} for refund of^{court fees is hereby} pray"r. declined."f-tne-applicant

¶15

In view of^{the above su[missionmade by tfe Ld' Counselfor} appficanr^{bank, IA no.rdSf/ZOZ5 is altowed ' TAlL9l7l2022 is} ;'irfiit*d^{as withdrawn. Registry is directedto return the} oiiginar documents^{ateiree-pingthe certified copies} on records.

¶16

File be consigned^{to recordroom'}

¶17

sA (susHIL KUI(AR RASToGI) PRESIDING^OFFICER DRT-II, Delhi

Bank of Baroda v. M/S Seagull Maritime Agencies Private Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of Baroda v. M/S Seagull Maritime Agencies Private Limited

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