ARISETTY SATYANARAYANA MURTY SUGARS AND INDUSTRIES Vs. SUB COLLECTOR
LAWS(APH)-1992-9-2
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
Decided on September 18,1992

ARISETTY SATYANARAYANA MURTY SUGARS AND INDUSTRIES Appellant
VERSUS
SUB-COLLECTOR Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

M/S.GAR RE-ROLLING MILLS V. A.P.STATE FINANCIAL CORPORATION [REFERRED TO]
KRISHNA UTENSILS RAMPUR VS. STATE FINANCIAL CORPN [REFERRED TO]
SUBBA REDDY VS. ANDHRA PRADESH STATE FINANCIAL CORPORATION [REFERRED TO]



Cited Judgements :-

AMRIT DYE CHEM INDUSTRIES VS. BONZANZA DURGS AND CHEMICALS LIMITED [LAWS(GJH)-1998-9-25] [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

- (1.)The petitioner-firm purchased a sick Khandasari sugar factory from the 3rd respondent A.P. State Financial Corporation and obtained a loan from the 3rd respondent for that purpose. For various reasons, the petitioner committed default in making repayment of the loan resulting in the 3rd respondent resorting to S. 31 of the State Financial Corporations Act, 1951 ('the Act'), for short in filing O.P. No. 53/75 in the District Court, Srikakulam A decree dt. 21-6-78 was passed for sale of the mortgaged properties for realising the loan amount and interest, in favour of the 3rd respondent, and in execution of the said decree an execution petition was filed on 21-6-78. Earlier, there was attachment before judgment of the properties of the petitioner-firm on 10-8-1977.
(2.)The 3rd respondent, without executing the decree in O.P. No. 53/75, invoked the provisions of S. 52. A of the Revenue Recovery Act, and the 2nd respondent brought the machinery of the petitioner-firm to sale and the sale was knocked down in favour of the 4th respondent for a sum of Rs. 75,000/-.
(3.)The petitioner assails the sale held by the 2nd respondent, firstly on the ground that once the third respondent invoked S. 31 of the Act, the proceedings under the. Revenue Recovery Act 1864, cannot be taken. The sale is also attacked on the ground that there was no notice to the petitioner and there was no notification of the sale, and hence the sale is vitiated, It is the further contention of the petitioner, that valuable properties of the petitioner-firm were sold for a meagre sum of Rs.75,000/- where the machinery is worth more than Rs. 2 lakhs,
;


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