Debts Recovery Tribunals and Appellate Tribunals

YES BANK vs SANJEEV KUMAR on 27 August 2026

Cites 0, Cited by 0

Citations and Judicial Treatment

No citing decisions in the index yet

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…

Debts Recovery Tribunal-Il, Delhi TAl2Lt6l2022 YES BANKVS SANJEEV KUMAR 27.08.2026 Item no.29 Present Ms. Sonia Rawat, Counsel for applicant bank None for defendant Matter is taken through Video Conferencing/ Hybrid Mode. lA no.243212026 has been filed by the applicant bank for withdrawal of the present TA. The Ld. Crunsel for the applicant bank submifted that the settlement had taken place during the pendency of case, and therefore, the applicant bank is entitled for refund of the court fees paid by it, as per rules. She further submits that she wish to withdraw the present TA. The Ld. Counsel for 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 Honble Supreme Couft has passed the order in SLP(c) No(s).723/2023 dated 28.01.2025 titled 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 Arbitration, Conciliation, judicial rettlement, including through Lok Adalat or mdiation for sfflement and the ase is dridd in terms of such a settlement and not otherwise. Para 7- In the ase at hanQ the sefilement in terms of which the wond appal was decided by the High Court is not on reference to any of the above authorities/fora rather it was an amiable *ttlement out of the court. Para 8- Accordingly, we are of the opinion that the ptitioner is not entitld to refund of the coutt ftrs and the High Coutt has not committd any error or illegality in refusing such a prayer." In view of the above, it is clear that if the matter has been settled out of the court without any referencefrom the court or Tribunal, ql I

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 bank, IA no.243212026 is allowed. TN2ll6l2022 is dismissed as withdrawn. File be consigned to record. _--- \ CA (SUSHIL KUMAR RASTOGI) PRESIDING OFFICER DRT-II, Delhi c

You have used today's free searches. Sign in, for free, to keep searching without a limit.

Compass reads the judgments for you and finds the paragraphs for and against your question. Sign in to use it.

My Vault follows judgments for you and records every later decision that cites them. Sign in to keep one.

Sign in to download the court's PDF. The full text stays free to read here.

Sign in, for free, to download the court copy. Reading the full text here stays open to everyone.

Search and read Indian judgments without limits, save them to My Vault and find the relevant paragraphs with Compass.

Open the sign-in page instead