Dismissed

Punjab National Bank v. Satish Pandey

DRT19 Jun 2025TA/38/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

An appellant bank requested withdrawal of an application before the Debts Recovery Tribunal and sought a refund of court fees claimed on the basis of a Supreme Court directive regarding amicable settlements. The Tribunal relied on Supreme Court reasoning that court fee refunds are not permissible for extrajudicial settlements lacking specific statutory references. Consequently, the refund prayer w

What did the court decide?

Prayer for refund of court fees declined. Application WA/TA dismissed as withdrawn.

Punjab National Bank versus Satish Pandey — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2025)

¶1

]

¶2

Debts Re(overyT Tribunal-Il, Delhi

¶3

;rA/38¹²⁰²² PUNJAB NATIOtr{AL BANK VS SATISH PANDEY

¶4

19.06.2025

¶5

Item no.38

¶6

Present: Mr. Prashant Kumar, Counsel for applicant bank None for defendants

¶7

M atter is taken ttrreeglt#ideo Conferenci^{n g/Hybridmode.} :+.-if i'ir

¶8

The ld. Counsel for.-affiicant bank submitted that^{matterhas been} settled and the account ,,fras been^{regularized.He furthersubmits} that he wish to withdraw the^{present TA.}

¶9

The Ld. CounseJ of the applicant^{has also requested for} refund of the.court fees. It is submitted^{that the matterhas been} settled and therefore, the coutt^{fees may be refunded as per} provisions contained in the rules. In this regard the^{Hon'ble Supreme} Court has^passed the^rorder in^{fiLP(c) No(s).723/2023 dated} 28,01.2025 titted as Jage^{Ram Vs Ved Kaur & Ors. The Hon'ble} Supreme Court has considered^{the matter and has held that:}

¶10

court fees is^permissible only if, the matter is to Arbitration, Conciliation, iudicial settlement, through Lok Adalat or^mediation for settlement and the case^is decided^{in termsof such} a settlement and not otherwise.

¶11

Para 7- In the case at hand, the^{settlementin terms of} which the second appeal was decided^{by the High Court} is not on reference to any of the^{above authorities/fora} rather it was an amicable settlement^{out of the court.}

¶12

Para 8- Accordingly, we are of^{the opinion that the} petitioner is not entitled to refund of the court fees and the High Court has qot committed^{any eror or illegality} in refisingt stlc@ffiler. "

¶13

In view of the above, it is clear that^{if the matterhas been settled} out of the court without,lany^{reference from the court or Tribunal,} the court fees cannot be refunded.^{Therefore,the prayer of the} applicant for refund of couft^{fees is hereby declined.}

¶14

In view of the above submission^{made by the Ld. Counsel for} applicant bank,.TA/3812022^is dismissed^{as withdrawn.}

¶15

File be consigned to record room.

¶16

¶17

t"'l
'ri
ll&

¶18

(susHrl KUrvrAR RASTOGI) PRESIDING OFFICER DRT-II, Delhi

Punjab National Bank v. Satish Pandey

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Punjab National Bank v. Satish Pandey

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