Allowed

Hdfc Bank v. Suresh Kumar

DRT22 May 2026TA/647/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The applicant bank moved to withdraw a transfer application (TA) pursuant to a settlement with the respondent, wherein the respondent paid Rs. 8,30,000 to close the loan account. The court rejected the plea for refund of court fees citing Jage Ram, as the settlement was amiable and outside the court process, but allowed the withdrawal of the TA, dismissing it as withdrawn.

What did the court decide?

IA no.3084/2025 (withdrawal of TA) allowed; TN6471/2022 dismissed as withdrawn. Prayer for refund of court fees declined.

Hdfc Bank versus Suresh Kumar — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

¶1

Debts Recovery TribunaFll, Delhi

¶2

TAl647l2022

¶3

HDFC BANKVS SURESH KUMAR

¶4

22.05.2026

¶5

Item no.81

¶6

Present: Mr. Aniruddh lGushik, Counsel for applicant bank None for defendants

¶7

Matter is taken through Video Conferencing/ Hybrid Mode.

¶8

IA no.3084l2025 has been filed by the applicant bank for withdrawal of the^present TA.

¶9

The l-d. Counsel for the applicant bank submitted that the defendanVs reached a compromise/settlement with the applicant bank and agreed to pay Rs. 8,30,000/- towards full and final settlement and satisfaction of his/their liabilities under the subject loan accounV agreement. In terms of the said settlement arrived at between the^pafties, defendanVs has/have paid Rupees 8,30,000/- to the applicant bank and as such subject loan account stands closed as on date in consonance with the law. It is humbly^prayed to this Hon'ble Tribunal to allow the applicant bank to withdraw the^present Transfer Application. Hence, the applicant bank wishes to withdraw the^present TA.

¶10

:l .,] nsel forthe applicant bank has also rcquested ft 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 in Hontle Supreme Court has passed the No(s).723/2023 datd 28.01.2025 titld as Jage Ram Vs Vd Kaur & Orc. The Honble Supreme Court has considered the matter and has held that:

¶11

Pan 6- The refund of coutt frc is prmissible only if the matter is refend to Arbitration, Conciliafr'oa judicial *ttlement, including through Lok Adalat or mdiafr'on for sttlement and the cas is decidd in terms of suclt a rettlement and not otherwis.

¶12

Pan 7- In the case at hand the stflement in terms of which the wond appal was dsidd by the Hbh Court is not on rcference to any of the afuve authoritis/fon nther it was an amiable sttlement outof the ourt

¶13

Para 8- we are of the opinion that the is not entiild to refund o! ry ourt fm q

¶14

and the High Court has not committed any error or illegaliU in refusing such a prayer."

¶15

In view of the above, it is clear that if the matter has been settled out of the court without any reference from the couft or Tribunal, 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, IA no.3084/2025 is allowed. TN64712022 is dismissed as withdrawn.

¶17

File be consigned to record room.

¶18

--*.. s4

¶19

(susHrL r6unn RAsroGr) PRESIDING OFFICER DRT-II, Delhi

Hdfc Bank v. Suresh Kumar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hdfc Bank v. Suresh 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