STATE BANK OF INDIA vs RAJ KUMAR on 21 September 2026

Debts Recovery Tribunal-Il, Delhi TAlL64IJl2023 STATE BANK OF INDIA Vs RAI KUMAR 2L.09.2026 Item no. 21 Present: Shri Manoj Kumar Mishra, counsel for applicant bank. Matter is taken through Video Conferencing/ Hybrid Mode.

2. IA no.238ol2026 has been filed by the applicant bank for withdrawal of the present OA and refund of the court fee.

3. The Ld. Counsel for the applicant bank has submitted that after filing of the present OA, the defendants approached the applicant bank for a one-time settlement of the account and the request of the defendants was accepted by the applicant ban( and in terms thereof, the defendants had paid the entire amount, and accordingly, their account was closed. Therefore, this application for withdrawal of the case being settled and satisfied. Therefore, it is prayed to withdraw the present TA and prayed for refund of the couft fee.

4. Heard the Ld. Counselfor applicant bank and perused the records.

5. The Ld. Counsel of the applicant bank has requested for refund of the couft fees. It is submitted that in terms thereof, the defendanb had paid the entire amount, and accordingly, their account was closed, therefore, the couft fees may be refunded as per provisions contained in the rules. In this regard theW Hontle Supreme Court has passed the order in SLP(c) No(s).72312023 dated 28.0L.2025 titled as Jage Ram Vs_.Ved Kaur &Ors. The e).

Honble Supreme Court has mnsidered the matter and has held that: Para 6- The refund of court fes is prmissible only i[, the matter is referrd to Arbitration, @nciliation, judicial sfilement including through Lok Adalat or mdiahbn for *ttlement and the cae is duidd in terms of such a sttlement and not otherwise. Para 7- In the care at hanQ the sttlement in terms of which the scond appeal was duidd by the High @urt is not on reference to any of the abve authorities/fora rather it was an amicable ettlement out of the ourt Para 8- Accordingly, we are of the opinion that the petitioner is not entitld to refund of the court fes and the High &uft has not committd any error or illqality in refusing such a prayer."

6. In view of the above,TAllilOl2023 is dismissed as withdrawn.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 The matter has been withdrawn due to in terms thereof, the defendants had paid the entire amount, and accordingly, their account was closed. Therefore, the prayer of the applicant bank for refund of court fees is hereby declined. All the pending IAs stand disposed of. IA no.238O/2O26 is disposed off accoldingly. File be consigned to record room. Date on L7.1L.2O26, already fixed before this Tribunal stands cancelled. <\. tA. (susHrL KUMAR RASTOGD PRESIDING OFFICER DRT-II, Delhi P