Dismissed

Yes Bank v. M/S Nitya Traders through Its Prop. Sapna Jindal & Ors.

DRT23 Mar 2026OA/869/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal dismissed an application for withdrawal of an Origin Application and denied a refund of court fees. The Tribunal held that the Settiment was out of court and not through Lok Adalat or arbitration, thus no refund was permissible per Supreme Court precedent.

What did the court decide?

Application for refund of court fee is denied. Withdrawal of Origin Application is allowed.

Yes Bank versus M/S Nitya Traders through Its Prop. Sapna Jindal & Ors. — DRT (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

Debts Recovery Tribunal-Il, Delhi

¶2

0A/86912024

¶3

YES BANK VS M/S NITYA TRADERS THROUGH ITS PROP.

¶4

23.03.2026 Item no.27

¶5

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

¶6

Matter is taken through Video Conferencingl Hybrid Mode.

¶7

IA no,35712026 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. Counsel 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 couft fees may be refunded as per^provisions contained in the rules. In this regard theW Honble Supreme Couft has^passed the order in SLP(c) No(s).72312023 dated 28.01.2025 titled as Jage Ram Vs Ved Kaur & Ors. The Honble Supreme Court has considered the matter and has held that:

¶11

Para 6- The refund of court fees is permissible only if, the matter is referrd to Arbitration, Conciliation, judicial rettlemenl inclu(ing Qrough Lok Adalat or g^

¶12

mediation for rettlement and the case is deciM in terms of such a settlement and not otherwise.

¶13

Para 7- In the case at hand, the settlement in terms of which the srcond appal was decided by the^High Court is not on reference to any of the afuve authorities/fora rather it was an amiable settlement out of the court

¶14

Para B- Accordingly, we are of the opnion that the ptr'tioner is not entitld to refund of the court fes and the High Court has not committd any error or illegality in refusing such a^prayer. "

¶15

In view of the above, 0A/86912024 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 settlement in Lok Adalat. There appears^no occasion to return the court fee. The matter has been withdrawn due to the matter has been settled and the loan account of the defendants has been closed accordingly. Therefore, the^prayer of the applicant bank for rcfund of coutt fees is hereby declined. Al! the pending IAs stand disposed of. IA no.35712026 is disposed off accordingly.

¶16

File be consigned to record room.

¶17

E} \ (susHrl KUMAR RASTOGI) PRESIDING OFFICER DRT-II, Delhi

¶18

Yes Bank v. M/S Nitya Traders through Its Prop. Sapna Jindal & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Yes Bank v. M/S Nitya Traders through Its Prop. Sapna Jindal & 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