Jawahar Lal Gupta, J. - (1.) HARYANA Financial Corporation is the petitioner. It prays that the orders dated May 15, 1997 and August 22, 1997, passed by the Debt Recovery Tribunal, be quashed. Copies of these orders have been produced on record as Annexures P6 and P7, respectively.
(2.) VIDE order dated May 15, 1997 the Tribunal had decided the petitioner's application. In this application it was prayed by the petitioner that the auction of the plant, machinery and building of respondent No. 5 (M/s B.C. Finance and Industries Limited) be stayed and that the Corporation be given permission to conduct auction. In the alternative it was prayed that the outstanding amount due to the Financial Corporation shall be the first charge on the auction money. The matter was considered by the Tribunal. It was held that the Corporation had the first charge over the property mentioned at serial No. 1. So far as the prayer for allowing the Corporation to sell the property through the Collector, Sirsa, under the provisions of Haryana Public Money (Recovery of Dues) Act, 1979, is concerned, the prayer was declined. The auctioneer was directed to sell the property. In pursuance to the above -mentioned order passed by the Tribunal, the auction was actually held on May 20, 1997. The petitioner as also other parties filed objections. The matter was considered by the Tribunal. Vide order dated August 22,1997, the auction was set aside. The petitioner alleges that the Debt Recovery Tribunal has no jurisdiction over the State Financial Corporations, as these are governed by the provisions or the State Financial Corporations Act, 1951. Consequently, it prays that the orders passed by the Debt Recovery Tribunal for auction of the property be quashed.
(3.) THE prayer made on behalf of the petitioner has been controverted by the respondents by filing separate written statements. Counsels for the parties have been heard.;