Partly allowed

State Bank of India v. Alankar Kumar

DRT29 Jul 2026TA/1247/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Deputy Recovery Tribunal weakened the applicant bank's claim for a refund of court fees filed under SLp(c) No. 223/2023, citing that the settlement occurred amicably outside the court without reference to arbitration or mediation authorities.

What did the court decide?

IA No. 216/2026 allowed for withdrawal and return of documents; prayer for court fee refund declined; Order No. TA 247/2023 dismissed as withdrawn.

State Bank of India versus Alankar Kumar — Service and Employment | DRT (2026)

¶1

Deb,ts Recovery Tribunal-Il, Delhi

¶2

TAlL247l2023 STATE BANK OF INDIA Vs ALANT(AR KUMAR AilD oRs

¶3

29.07.2026

¶4

Item no. 38

¶5

Present: Mr. Yogesh^pachauri, counsel for applicant bank. Defendants are ex-pafte, since, 30.01.2025.

¶6

Matter is taken through Video C.onferencing/ hybrid Mode.

¶7

IA no.216U2O26 has been filed by the applicant bank for withdrawal of the present TA.

¶8

The Ld. Counsel for the applicant bank submits that during the pendency of the aforesaid O.A., the defendants approached the bank and settled the matter by paying the outstanding dues of the bank i.e., Rs. Rs.70,61,49!- in full and final and No Dues Certificate dated 19.03.2026 issued by the Applicant Bank. He further submits that he wishes to withdraw the present TA, refund of court fees and return of original documents.

¶9

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 as per provisions mntained in the rules. In this regard the Honble Supreme Court has passed the order in SLp(c) No(s)223/2023 dated 28.01.2025 titld as Jage Ram Vs Vd Kaur & Orc. The Honble Supreme Court has considered the matter and has held that:

¶10

Para 6- The refund of court fes is permissible only ifi the matter is referrd to Arbitration, hnciliatio4 judicr?l rettlement, includlng through Lok Adalat or mediation for settlement and the cas is drcidd in terms of such a sttlement and not otherwise.

¶11

Para 7- In the are at hand, the sttlement in terms of which the scond appal was dry'dd by the High wrl

¶12

Court is not on reference to any of the abve authorities/fora rather it was an amiabte sttlement out of the court.

¶13

Para 8- Accordingly, we are of the opinion that the petitioner is not entitled to refund of the court frc and the High @urt has not committd any error or iilqality in refusing such a prayer."

¶14

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 court fees is hereby declined. IA no.216112026 is allowed. TA t24tlZO23 is dismissed as withdrawn. Registry is directed to rcturn the original documents after keeping the ceftified copies on rccords. All the pending IAs stand disposed of.

¶15

File be consigned to record room.

¶16

(-.-r^{</sup> (SUSHIL KUMAR RASTOGI) PRESIDING OFFICER, DRT-II, Delhi}

State Bank of India v. Alankar Kumar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Alankar Kumar

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