Partly allowed
Idbi Bank v. Sushil Kumar
DRTOA/833/2025
Case brief
AI extract
What is this about?
The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the applicant bank's application for withdrawal of the ongoing Arbitration Order. The court dismissed the petition for refund of court fees, holding that out-of-court settlements do not warrant such refunds.
What did the court decide?
Withdrawal of OA allowed; prayer for refund of court fees declined.
What the court decided
AI extract
¶1
Debts Recovery Tribunal-Il, Delhi
¶2
oAl833l2O2S
¶3
IDBI BANK Vs SUSHIL KUMAR
¶4
2L.08.2026
¶5
Item no. 5
¶6
Present: Mr. Sanyam Gupta, counselfor applicant bank.
¶7
Matter is taken through Video Conferencing/ hybrid Mode.
¶8
- IA no.232812026 has been filed by the applicant bank for withdrawal of the present OA.
¶9
- The Ld. Counsel for the applicant bank submits that the Defendants have settled the matter with the Applicant Bank for an amount of Rs. 29,45,000/- and the Defendants have deposited the settlement amount, and the account of the Defendants stands settled. He further submits that he wishes to withdraw thepresent oA.
¶10
- The Ld. Counsel of the applicant bank has also requested for refund of the court fees. It is submitted that the matter has been settled and therefore, the court fees may be refunded asper provisions contained in the rules. In this regard the Honble Supreme Couft haspassed the order in SLP(c) No(s).723/2023 dated 28.01.2025 titld as Jage Ram Vs Ved Kaur & Orc. The Hontle Supreme Court has considered the matter and has held that:
Parties & counsel
AI extract
- petitioner
IDBI BANK
- respondent
SUSHIL KUMAR
Coram
AI extract
GUSHIL KUMAR RASTOGI
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court