Dismissed

Yes Bank v. Bright Westech Solution Private Limited

DRT25 Aug 2026OA/424/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Yes Bank sought withdrawal of an objection to arbitration (OA) and refund of court fees upon settlement of a loan dispute. The Tribunal declined the refund, noting the settlement was an amicable one-out-of-court rather than via Lok Adalat or arbitration reference, and dismissed the OA as withdrawn.

What did the court decide?

Withdrawal of the objection allowed; prayer for refund of court fees declined; all pending affiliated applications disposed of.

Yes Bank versus Bright Westech Solution Private Limited — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

Debts Recovety Tribunal-Il, Dethi

¶2

oAl42412O2s YES BANK Vs BRIGHT WESTECH SoLUTIoN PRTVATE LIMITED

¶3

25.08.2026

¶4

Item no. 36

¶5

Present: Ms. Sonia Rawat, counsel for applicant bank. None for defendants.

¶6

Matter is taken through Video Conferencing/ Hybrid Mode.

¶7

IA no.228312026 has been filed by the applicant bank for withdrawal of the present OA and refund of the couft fee.

¶8

The Ld. Counsel for the applicant bank submits that the matter has been settled and the loan account of the defendants has been closed accordingly. Therefore, it is prayed to withdraw the present OA and prayed for refund of the court fee.

¶9

Heard the Ld. Counsel for applicant bank and perused the records.

¶10

The Ld. C-ounsel of the applicant bank has requested for refund of the court fees. It is submitted that the matter has been settled and the loan account of the defendants has been closed accordingly, therefore, the court fees may be refunded as per provisions contained in the rules. In this regard theW Honble Supreme Court has passed the order in SLP(c) No(s).723l2023 dated 28.01.2025 tiiled as Jage Ram Vs Ved Kaur & Ors. The Honble Supreme Couft has considered the matter and has held that:

¶11

Para 6- The refund of court fes is prmisstble only if, the matter is referrd to Arbftration, Concitiatio4 judicial settlemenl including through Lok Adalat or

¶12

¶13

mdiation for stflement and the are is deqdd in terms of such a settlement and not otherwrfu.

¶14

Para 7- In the case at hane the settlement in terms o! which the suond appat was dtdd by the HEh Court is not on reference to any of the aboue authoriti/fora rather it was an amicable setflement out ofthe court

¶15

Pan 8- Accordingly, we are of the opinbn that the ptt'tioner is not entittd to refund of the court fes and the High Court has not committed any error or illqality in refusing such a prayer,,

¶16

In view of the above, OAl424l2O25 is dismissed as withdrawn. The applicant bank has also sought refund of court fee. The matter has not been disposed of on the basis of setflement in Lok Adalat. There appears no occasion to return the court fee. The matter has been withdrawn due to the matter has been seftled and the loan account of the defendants has been closed accordingty. Therefore, the prayer of the appticant bank for refund of court fees is hercby declined. All the pending IAs stand disposed of. IA no.22g3l2O26 is disposed off acrordingly.

¶17

File be consigned to record room.

¶18

s") (SUSHIL KUMAR RASTOGI) PRESIDING OFFICER DRT-II, Delhi

¶19

Yes Bank v. Bright Westech Solution Private Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Yes Bank v. Bright Westech Solution 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