Debts Recovery Tribunals and Appellate Tribunals
UNION BANK OF INDIA vs SH PRAVAL JAIN on 17 July 2026
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
Deb,ts Recovery Tribunal-Il, Delhi TAlt657l2O22 UNION BANK OF II{DIA Vs SH PRAVAL JAIN t7.07.2026 Item no. 54 Present: Mr. Samarendra Kumar, counsel for applicant bank. None for defendant no.1 and 2. Defendant no.3 is ex-parte, since, 30.08.2023. Matter is taken through Video Conferencing/ hybrid Mode.
2. IA no.21812026 has been filed by the applicant bank for withdrawal of the present TA.
3. The l-d. C-ounsel for the applicant bank submits that the Respondents have already paid the entire settlement amount to the Applicant Bank and the Applicant Bank has issued the No Dues Certificate, hence nothing remains to recover against the Respondents in the present Original Application. He further submits that he wishes to withdraw the present TA.
4. 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 contained in the rules. In this regard the Hontle Supreme Court has passed the order in SLP(c) No(s).723/2023 da@ 28.01.2025 titld as Jage Ram Vs Vd Kaur & Orc. The Hontle Supreme Court has considered the matter and has held that: Para 6- The refund of court fres is permissible only ifi the matter is refend to Arbitration, Conciliatio4 judicial fttflement, including through Lok Adalat or mdiation for setflement and the cas is dqidd in terms of such a settlement and not otherwis. Para 7- In the ca* at hand, the sttlement in terms of which the scond appeal was dqbd by the High {;1, Court is not on reference to any of the abve authoritis/fora rather it was an amiable stflement out of the auft. Pan 8- Accordingly, we are of iln opinion that the retitioner is not entitld to refund of ilrc court frc and the High Court has not committd any error or iltqality in refusing such a prayer."
5. 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.218/2026is allowed. TAt6SZl2O22 is dismissed as withdrawn. Allthe pending IAs stand disposed of. File be consigned to record room. (,r\ . (susHrL KUMAR RASTOGT) PRESIDING OFFICER, DRT-II, De|hi