Dismissed

State Bank of India v. M/S. Nextgen Exports Private Limited and Ors.

DRT13 Jun 2025TA/962/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal Delhi allowed the withdrawal of an interim application as debt recovery was completed via auction. The court refused to refund court fees, relying on Supreme Court precedent that out-of-court settlements without statutory referral do not warrant fee refunds.

What did the court decide?

IA No.4637/2024 allowed as withdrawn; prayer for refund of court fees rejected.

State Bank of India versus M/S. Nextgen Exports Private… — Company and Corporate | DRT (2025)

¶1

Debts Recovery Tribunal-Il,^Delhi

¶2

TAl96212024

¶3

STATE BANK OF INDIAVs^{M/S. NEXTGEN EXPORTS} PRIVATE LIMITED AND ORS

¶4

13.06.2025

¶5

Item no.45

¶6

Present: Mr. Raj Kumar, Prory Counsel for^{Mr. Pradeep} Dhaka, Counsel for applicant bank Mr. Khalid Abdullah, Counsel for defendant^no.2 None for other defendants

¶7

Matter is taken through Video Conferencing/Hybrid^mode.

¶8

IA no.463712024 has been filed by the applicant^{bank for} withdrawal of the^present TA.

¶9

The Ld. Counsel for the applicant bank^{submitsthat the} applicant bank has taken over the^{physical possessionof} moftgaged property. Thereafter the applicant^{bank has} auctioned the mortgaged^{propefi and sale proceeds have been} appropriated in the loan account of^{the defendants and thereby} the applicant bank recovered the entire dues and^accordingly the loan account of the defendants^{stands closed. Therefore,he} wishes to withdraw the^{present TA.}

¶10

The Ld. Counse! of the applicant has also^requestedfor 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} dated 28.01.2025 titled as Jage^{RamVs Vd Kaur & Ors. The} Honble Supreme Court has considered^{the matter and has held} that:

¶11

Para 6- The refund of court fes^{is permissible only} if, the matter is referrd to ArbitratioO^{Conciliation,} judicial fittlement, including through Lok Adalat or mediation for sttlement and the^{ase is decidedin} terms of such a settlement and not^otherwise.

¶12

Para 7- In the ase at hand,^{the sexlement in terms} of which the second appal^{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.

¶13

{)...

¶14

Para B- Accordingly, we are of the opinion that the petitioner is not entiild to refund oi ne court fffi q1d the High Court has not committd any error or illegality in refusing such a prayer.,,

¶15

In..view of tlre above, it is clear that if the matter has been settled out of the court without any reference from ttre court or Tribunal, the court fees cannot be refunded. fnerefore, ih; prayer of the applicant for refund of court fees is nlreUy decr i ned.' rA no.4637 I 2024 is a r rowed . T N goit zoz4 is dism issed as withdrawn.

¶16

File be consigned to record room.

¶17

T, (susHrL Xtfrnn RAsToGr) PRESIDING OFFICER DRT-II, De|hi

State Bank of India v. M/S. Nextgen Exports Private Limited and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. M/S. Nextgen Exports Private Limited and Ors.

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