Partly allowed

State Bank of India v. Amita Tiwari and Anr.

DRT24 Jul 2025TA/348/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal considered an application for withdrawal of an appeal and refund of court fees following a settlement. Citing the Supreme Court, the Court held that court fees are refundable only upon reference to arbitration, conciliation, or Lok Adalat. Refusing the refund prayer as the settlement was out-of-court, the appeal was withdrawn.

What did the court decide?

Application no. 133 of 2025 allowed for withdrawal of Appeal no. 348 of 2024; prayer for refund of court fees declined; pending IAs disposed.

State Bank of India versus Amita Tiwari and Anr. — Civil Procedure and Limitation | DRT (2025)

¶1

Debts Recovery Tribunal-Il, Dethi

¶2

TAl348l2024 STATE BANK OF INDIA Vs AMITA TIWARI AND A]{R

¶3

24.07.2025

¶4

Item no. 57

¶5

Present: Mr. Hitesh, counsel for applicant bank. None for defendants.

¶6

Matter is taken through Video Conferencing/ hybrid Mode.

¶7

IA no.133Ll2OZS has been fited by the appticant bank for withdrawal of the present TA.

¶8

The Ld. counser for the appricant bank submits that defendants approached the Appricant Bank with the proposar of setuement and the same was duly approved by the Competent Authority of Applicant Bank in the year 2022, the Appricant received the entire amount. It is submitted that the account has been closed on 76.08.2022, and he wish to withdraw the present TA.

¶9

The Ld. C-ounsel 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 rures. In this regard the Honbre Supreme Court has passed the order in SLp(c) No(s).723/2023 datd 28.01.2025 tittd as Jage Ram Vs Ved Kaur & Orc. The Honble supreme court has considered the matter and has held that

¶10

Para 6- The refund of court fes is permissibte onty if the matter is referrd to ArbitratioO Conciliatio4 judicial rettfement, inctuding through Lok Adalat or mdbtion for setflement and the as is duidd in terms of such a *ttlement and not otherwie.

¶11

Para 7- In the ca* at hane the stflement in terms of which the sond appeal was dsidd by the High Court is not on reference to any of tlg above

¶12

€.\

¶13

authorities/Fora rather it was an amiable setilement out of the court.

¶14

Para 8- Accordingly, we are of the opinion that the petitioner is not entitld to refund of the court fes and the High Court has notommittd anyenororiilqality in refusing such a prayer"

¶15

In view of the above, it is clear that if the matter has been settled out of the court without any reference from the couft or Tribunal, the court fees cannot be refunded. Therefore, the prayer of the applicant bank for refund of court fees is hereby declined. IA no.133112025 is allowed. TA34B|ZO24 is dismissed as withdrawn. Allthe pending IAs stand disposed of.

¶16

File be consigned to record room.

¶17

gI (SUSHIL KUr,tAR RASTOGI) PRESIDING OFFICE& DRT-II, Delhi

State Bank of India v. Amita Tiwari and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Amita Tiwari and Anr.

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