Allowed

Yes Bank v. Prashant Kumar Agrawal & Anr.

DRT27 Aug 2026OA/522/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal dismissed the withdrawal of Original Application No. 239812025 filed by Yes Bank. While the withdrawal request was allowed, the request for refund of court fees was declined because the settlement was achieved amicably out of court without reference to the Tribunal or authorities specified in *Jage Ram*.

What did the court decide?

Original Application No. 239812025 allowed; prayer for refund of court fees declined.

Yes Bank versus Prashant Kumar Agrawal & Anr. — DRT (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

Debts Recovery Tribunal-Il, Delhi

¶2

oA/s22l2024 YES BANKVs PRASHANT KUMARAGRAWAL &ANR

¶3

27.08.2026

¶4

Item no.31

¶5

Present: Ms. Sonia Rawat, Counsel for applicant bank None for defendant

¶6

Matter is taken through Video Conferencing/^HybridMode.

¶7

IA no.239812026 has been filed by the applicant^{bank for} withdrawal of the^present OA.

¶8

The Ld. Counsel for the applicant bank^{submittedthat the matter} has been settled and the^{loan accountsof the defendants have} been closed accordingly. Therefore,^{the applicant bankseeks} permission of this Hon'ble Tribunal to withdraw the^present Original Application, as seftled.^{She fufther submitsthat she} wish to withdraw the Present OA.

¶9

The Ld. Counsel 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 Hontle Supreme Court has^{passedthe order in SLP(c)} No(s).723/2023 dated 28.01.2025^{titled as Jage Ram Vs Ved} Kaur & Ors. The Honble^{SupremeCourt has consideredthe} matter and has held that:

¶10

Para 6- The refund of court fes^{is permissible only} if, the matter is referd to Arbitratio4^{Conciliation,} judicial *ttlement, including through Lok Adalat or mediation for sttlement and the^{case is} ddiddⁱⁿ terms of such a settlement and not otherwis.

¶11

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

¶12

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 not commifid^{any error 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^{referencefrom the courtor Tribunal,}

¶14

9{\

¶15

the court fees cannot be refunded. Therefore, the^prayer of the applicant bank for refund of court fees is hereby declined.

¶16

In view of the above submission made by the Ld. Counsel for applicant bank, [A no.239812026 is allowed. ON52212024 is dismissed as withdrawn.

¶17

File be consigned to record.

¶18

s.)

¶19

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

¶20

Yes Bank v. Prashant Kumar Agrawal & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Yes Bank v. Prashant Kumar Agrawal & Anr.

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