BANK OF BARODA vs M/S SEAGULL MARITIME AGENCIES PRIVATE LIMITED on 18 June 2025

Debts RecoverY Tribunal-Il, Delhi TAlL9L7l2022 BANK OF BARODA VS M/S SEAGULL MARTflME AGEI{CIES PRIVATE UMITED 18.06.2025 Item no.36 Present: Mr. Amit Mahaliyan, Counsel for applicant bank None for defendants Matter is takeir through Mdeo Conferencing/Hybrid mode' IA no.1o51l2D25 has been filed by the applicant bank for withdrawal of the Present TA. TheLd.Counselfortheapplicantbanksubmitsthatthepresent original application, the defendants had approached the apiticant Gnk for an One Time Settlement (OTS") for an amount of Rs 4,60,00,000/- (Rupees Four Crores Sixty fnousana On$), and the same was agreed by the applicant bank, vide OnJlme SetHement Letter dated 27'03'2025'ltlle ippiit rt bank has received the entire said oTS amount of nll+,so"Oop00/-, and a no due certificate has also been issued to the 'defendants and the original title deeds qua the mortgaged property has also been released' It is humbly ruU.lti"O tfrlt iince the present matter now stands settled. It isf,rrUfyprayedtothisHon'bleTribunaltoallowtheapplicant Ln[ to *iu,o'ra* the present Transfer Application. Ld. counsel i"i ippfi..nt bank atso prayed for return of the original documents. The Ld. Counsel of the applicant has also requested for reruna of the court fees. It is submitted that the matter has 5"ln settled and therefore, the court fees may be refunded-as p"i pr*itlons contained in the rules. In this regard the H-o1-t!e- 5rpt"r" Court has passd the order in SLP(c) No(9'7232923 -a'itA ia.ot.il25 d'ild as Jage Ram vs ved Kaur & orc'The iontr" supreme c-ourt has considered the matter and has held that Para 6- The refund of ourt fes is permissible only rt the matter is rcferrd to Arbitration, Conciliation, iLaiciat *ttlement, inctuding through Lok Adalat or -mdiation br sttlement and the ase is decidd in terms of such a xttlementbnd not otherwise' Para 7- In the ase at han4 the settlement in terms of which the wond appeal was decided by the High Court is not on reference to any of the above authoitia/fom ntfier it wa7 an amiable sexlement out of thd ourt. g,\

Para 8- Accordingly, *, ui of the opinion that the ptitnr", is not enttild to refund of the court fes 'and the High Court has not committed any error or iltqality iirefusing such a prayer'" In view of the above, it is clear that if the matter has been r*ifJ ort of lne court without any reference from the court or iiirir."L-tt'" court fees cannot be refunded' Therefore' the pray"r. "f-tne-applicant for refund of court fees is hereby declined. In view of the above su[mission made by tfe Ld' Counsel for appficanr bank, IA no.rdSf/ZOZ5 is altowed ' TAlL9l7l2022 is ;'irfiit*d as withdrawn. Registry is directed to return the oiiginar documents ateiree-ping the certified copies on records. File be consigned to record room' sA (susHIL KUI(AR RASToGI) PRESIDING OFFICER DRT-II, Delhi