SUNITA SHARMA Vs. U.P.STATE FINANCIAL CORPORATION, KANPUR AND OTHERS
LAWS(ALL)-2008-9-226
HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Decided on September 11,2008

SUNITA SHARMA Appellant
VERSUS
U.P.State Financial Corporation, Kanpur Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) THE petitioner has filed the present Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, inter alia, praying for quashing the order of attachment dated 26.10.1998 (Annxure-4 to the Writ Petition) and the Sale Proclamation dated 18.12.1998 (Annexure-9 to the Writ Petition), and further, for directing the respondent No. 1 to return the document of title in its possession to the petitioner, and further, for directing the respondents not to recover any amount from the petitioner in respect of the Bond executed by the petitioner dated J1.11.1992.
(2.) IT is, inter alia, stated in the Writ Petition that the respondent Nos. 7 to 10 constituted a partnership firm under the name and style of M/s Ahmad Agro Industries (respondent No. 6) for working of a unit at Plot No. K-12, measuring 691 square meters, at Industrial Area, Begrajpur, district-Muzaffarnagar for manufacturing agricultural implements; and that for the said purpose the respondent No. 6 through the partners got a term loan of Rs. 6,97,000/- as well as working capital loan for a sum of Rs. 3,38,000/- sanctioned under the single window scheme on 22.10.1990; and that in pursuance of the said sanction dated 22.10.1990, a loan agreement dated 14.3.1991 was executed between U.P. Financial Corporation and the respondent Nos. 6 to 10; and that the respondent Nos. 6 to 10 in pursuance of the said loan agreement also hypothecated land, building and machinery, equitable mortgage-deed by deposit of title deed and one of the partners Shafiq Ahmad created equitable mortgage of his property also. It is, inter alia, further stated in the Writ Petition that Smt. Anita Sharma, wife of Sri Kumidini Kant Sharma also executed a collateral security for the recovery of the working capital loan amounting to Rs. 3,38,000/-; and that, however, some dispute arose between Smt. Anita Sharma and the respondent Nos. 6 to 10, whereupon by letter dated 29.10.1992 the respondent Nos. 6 to 10 requested to change the guarantee of Smt. Anita Sharma to that of the petitioner; and that in pursuance of the said understanding the petitioner executed a Bond of Guarantee dated 11.11.1992; and that by means of the said Bond of Guarantee, the petitioner agreed to pay the sum of Rs. 3,38,000/- alongwith interest, the amount which was sanctioned towards working capital loan.
(3.) COPY of the Bond of Guarantee executed on 11.11.1992 alongwith the Receipt has been filed as Annexure-1 to the Writ Petition.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.