Application for withdrawal of temporary injunction and refund of court fees allowed. Withdrawal permitted on out-of-court settlement. Refund of fees declined as settlement was not via referred arbitration/Lok Adalat.
Temporary injunction withdrawn; original documents to be returned; refund of court fees declined.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Debts Recovely Tribunal-Il, Delhi
TAlts72l2023 STATE BANK OF INDIA Vs ARVIND NARAYAN SINGH
27.08.2026
Item no.30
Present: Sh. Anuj Yadav alongwith Sh. Hitendra Kr. Nahata, Counsels for applicant bank None for defendant
Matter is taken through Video Conferencing/ Hybrid Mode.
IA no.176512026 has been filed by the applicant bank for withdrawal of the present TA.
The Ld. Counsel for the applicant bank submitted that during the pendency of the present T.A. the present matter between the pafties, has been settled out of court amicably and the applicant bank has received entire settlement amount and nothing is to be remained due. He further submits that he wish to withdraw the present TA. The Ld. Counsel for applicant bank also prayed for return of the original documents.
The Ld. Counsel for the applicant bank has also rcquested 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 Honble Supreme Couft has passed 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:
Para 6- The refund of court fes is permissible only it the mafier is referrd to Arbitratio4 Conciliatioq judicial *ttlemenf including through Lok Adalat or mediation for settlement and the ase is decidd in terms of such a settlement and not otherwise.
Para 7- In the case at hand, the setflement in terms of which the recond appeal was dxided by the High Court is not on reference to any of the above authorities/fora rather it was an amicable sttlement out of the court.
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 committd any error or illegality in refusing such a prayq1."
<-"\
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.
In view of the above submission made by the Ld. Counsel for applicant ban( IA no.176512026 is allowed. TN157212023 is dismissed as withdrawn. Registry is directed to return the original documents after keeping the certified copies on records.
File be consigned to record.
9.\
(SUSHIL Kun rHR. RASTOGI) PRESIDING OFFICER DRT-II, Delhi
c
STATE BANK OF INDIA
ARVIND NARAYAN SINGH
SUSHIL KUMAR RASTOGI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
