Allowed

Yes Bank v. Hitesh Yadav

DRT27 Apr 2026OA/315/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the withdrawal of an original application filed by Yes Bank against Hitesh Yadav as the matter was settled. The request for refund of court fees was declined as the settlement was out of court without reference to arbitration or mediation.

What did the court decide?

The Original Application No.3146 dated 12.02.25 is allowed; Original Application No.3146/2025 is dismissed as withdrawn.

Yes Bank versus Hitesh Yadav — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

Debts Recovery Tribunal-Il, Delhi

¶2

oA/31s 12023 YES BANK Vs HITESH YADAV

¶3

27.04.2026

¶4

Item no.60

¶5

Present Ms. Sonia Rawat C.ounsel for applicant bank None for defendants

¶6

Matter is taken through Video Conferencingl Hybrid Mode.

¶7

rA no.314612o25 has been filed by the applicant bank for withdrawal of the present OA.

¶8

The Ld. counsel for the applicant bank submitted that the matter has been settled and the Ioan accounts of the defendants has been closed accordingly. Therefore, the applicant bank seeks permission of this Honble Tribunal to withdraw the present origina! Application, as settled. Hence, the applicant bank wishes to withdraw the present OA.

¶9

The Ld. counse! for the applicant bank has also requested for refund of the couft 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 Ram Vs Ved Kaur & ors. The Honble supreme couft has considered the matter and has held that:

¶10

Para 6- The refund of court fees is permissible only if the matter is referrd to Arbitration, Conciliation, judicial settlement, including through Lok Adalat or mediation for sttlement and the case is decidd in terms of such a settlement and not otherwix.

¶11

Para 7- In the case at hanQ the settlement in terms of which the second appeal was decided by the High Court is not on reference to any of the afuve authorities/fora rather it was an amicable sttlement out of the court.

¶12

Para B- Accordingly, we are of the opinion that the petitioner is not entitled to refund of the court fes and the High Court has not committed any eror or illegality in refusing such a prayer."

¶13

In view of the above, it is clear that if the matter has been settled out of the court without any reference from the court or Tribunal, the court fees cannot be refunded. Therefore, the prayer of the applicant bank for refund of couft fees__is_lpreby declined.

¶14

¶15

In view of the above submission made by the Ld. counset for applicant ban( IA no.3146lz02s is ailowed. oN3Lstzoz3 is dismissed as withdrawn.

¶16

File be consigned to record room.

¶17

gr\

¶18

(susHrl kuunn RASroGr) PRESIDING OFFICER DRT-II, De|hi

Yes Bank v. Hitesh Yadav

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Yes Bank v. Hitesh Yadav

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