Kurian Joseph, J. - (1.) Leave granted.
(2.) Out of the eight appeals before us, in five appeals the State who is a guarantor to the bonds, by which the borrower namely, Pradeshiya Industrial Development Corporation Ltd., UP (in short, "PICUP") collected money, is before this Court, aggrieved by the Judgment dated 24.01.2012 passed by the High Court of Allahabad, Lucknow Bench, in W.P.(C) No. 2838 (M/B) of 2005 and connected matter. In other three appeals, PICUP is before this Court, aggrieved by the same impugned Judgment.
(3.) Since the borrower failed to comply with the terms of the bonds, the respondents approached the High Court for a direction to the State, the Guarantor, to comply with the terms of guarantee. As per the impugned Judgment, the High Court held that the State had guaranteed the payment as per the terms of the bonds, but failed to honour the same. Accordingly, a direction was issued to the State to disburse the remaining amounts at contractual rates. It is pointed out that all the respondents have been paid the principal amounts. Thus aggrieved, the State and the PICUP are before this Court in respective appeals.;