ORDER

1. HEARD PARTIES.

2. THESE APPEALS CAN BE DISPOSED OF BY A COMMON ORDER AS BOTH APPEALS ARE DIRECTED AGAINST THE JUDGMENT OF THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH DATED 20-12-1995.

3. BRIEFLY STATED THE FACTS ARE:

THE ANDHRA PRADESH STATE FINANCIAL CORPORATION HAD LENT SOME AMOUNT TO THE FATHER OF RESPONDENT 3 IN CIVIL APPEALS NOS. 12830 AND 12831 OF 1996 AND RESPONDENT 1 IN CIVIL APPEALS NOS. 12834-35 OF 1996. AS THE AMOUNTS WERE NOT REPAID, THE FINANCIAL CORPORATION PURPORTED TO SELL THE PROPERTY TO THE APPELLANT IN CIVIL APPEALS NOS. 12830-31 OF 1996. THIS SALE WAS CHALLENGED. BY THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT THE SALE HAS BEEN SET ASIDE ON THE GROUND THAT THE GUIDELINES LAID DOWN BY THIS COURT IN THE CASE OF MAHESH CHANDRA V. REGIONAL MANAGER, U.P. FINANCIAL CORPN.1 HAVE NOT BEEN FOLLOWED.

4. IT IS POINTED OUT TO US THAT THIS DECISION HAS BEEN OVERRULED BY THIS COURT IN THE CASE OF HARYANA FINANCIAL CORPN. V. JAGDAMBA OIL MILLS2. IT IS SUBMITTED THAT AS THOSE GUIDELINES NO LONGER APPLY, THE ACTION OF THE CORPORATION UNDER SECTION 29 OF THE STATE FINANCIAL CORPORATIONS ACT, 1951 COULD NOT AND SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN INTERFERED WITH.

5. IT IS, HOWEVER, TO BE NOTED THAT EVEN IN H