SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
J. B. PARDIWALA, R. MAHADEVAN
Odisha State Financial Corporation – Appellant
Versus
Vigyan Chemical Industries – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
R. MAHADEVAN, J.
1. Leave granted.
2. The present appeal has been filed by the Odisha State Financial Corporation, a government corporation in the State of Odisha, against the final judgment and order dated 22.11.2022 passed by the High Court of Uttarakhand at Nainital1 [Hereinafter referred to as “the High Court”] in Writ Petition (M/S) No. 2314 of 2022, whereby the High Court dismissed the writ petition filed by the appellant under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, challenging the civil proceedings and the orders passed by the Courts below regarding the computation of interest on the decretal amount and the consequential execution proceedings.
BRIEF FACTS
3. The appellant, which is a State Financial Corporation, along with Industrial Promotion & Investment Corporation of Odisha2 [For short “IPICOL”] jointly financed an industrial unit, namely, M/s. Manorama Chemicals Works Ltd. (Respondent No. 2 herein) on 22.11.1984 for setting up a bleaching powder unit at Ganjam, Odisha. M/s. Vigyan Chemical Industries Limited Dehradun (Respondent No. 1 herein) supplied raw materials worth Rs. 66,454.65 to Respondent No. 2 on 29.07.1985. Since Respondent No. 2 defaulted in repa
Shaki Tubes Ltd. vs. State of Bihar, (2009) 7 SCC 673 [Para 4.5
Fertilizer Corporation of India Ltd. and Others vs. M/s. Coromandel Sacks Pvt. Ltd.
Municipal Corporation of Delhi vs. Gurnam Kaur, (1989) 1 SCC 101 [Para 13.1
State of U.P. vs. Synthetics and Chemicals Ltd.
Synthetics and Chemicals Ltd. and Others vs. State of U.P. and Others
B. Shama Rao vs. Union Territory of Pondicherry
Most Rev. P.M.A. Metropolitan vs. Moran Mar Marthoma
Abdullah Ashgar Ali Khan vs. Ganesh Dass
Sheosagar Singh vs. Sitaram Singh
State of U.P. vs. Synthetics and Chemicals Ltd.
State of W.B. vs. Kesoram Industries Ltd.
Zee Telefilms Ltd. vs. Union of India
A-One Granites vs. State of U.P.
Delhi Airtech Services (P) Ltd. vs. State of U.P.
NBCC (India) Ltd. vs. The State of West Bengal and Others
State of U.P. vs. Synthetics and Chemicals Ltd.
Municipal Corporation of Delhi vs. Gurnam Kaur
Brakewel Automotive Components (India) (P) Ltd. vs. P.R. Selvam Alagappan
Dhurandhar Prasad Singh vs. Jai Prakash University
Celir LLP vs. Sumati Prasad Bafna and Others
Midnapore Peoples Co-operative Bank Ltd. and Others vs. Chunilal Nanda and Others
Harshad Chiman Lal Modi vs. DLF Universal and Others
Hira Lal vs. Kali Nath MANU/SC/0041/1961 : (1962) 2 SCR 747 [Para 21]
Bahrein Petroleum Co. vs. Pappu MANU/SC/0012/1965 : (1966) 2 LLJ 144 SC [Para 21]
Jagmittar Sain Bhagat vs. Dir. Health Services, Haryana and Others
United Commercial Bank Ltd. vs. Their Workmen
Smt. Nai Bahu vs. Lal Ramnarayan and Others
Natraj Studios (P) Ltd. vs. Navrang Studios and Another
Kondiba Dagadu Kadam vs. Savitribai Sopan Gujar and Others
Premier Automobiles Ltd. vs. K.S. Wadke and Others
Chandrika Misir and Another vs. Bhaiyalal
Setrucharlu Ramabhadra Raju Bahadur vs. Maharaja of Jeypore
State of Gujarat vs. Rajesh Kumar Chimanlal Barot and Another
Harshad Chiman Lal Modi vs. D.L.F. Universal Ltd. and Another
Carona Ltd. vs. Parvathy Swaminathan and Sons
Saurav Jain and Another vs. M/s. A.B.P. Design and Another
Bharat Kala Bhandar (P) Ltd. vs. Municipal Committee
Vasant Kumar Radhakisan Vora vs. Board of Trustees of the Port of Bombay
Most Rev. P.M.A. Metropolitan vs. Moran Mar Marthoma
Masalti vs. State of Uttar Pradesh
Gangappa Gurupadappa Gugwad Gulbarga vs. Rachawwa and Others
Bihari Chaudhari vs. State of Bihar
Sawai Singhai Nirmal Chand vs. Union of India
Bishandayal and Sons vs. State of Orissa and Others
Gangappa Gurupadappa Gugwad vs. Rachawwa and Others
Ajay Hasia and Others vs. Khalid Mujib Sehravardi and Others
R.D. Shetty vs. The International Airport Authority of India and Others
Shanti Conductors (P) Ltd. vs. Assam State Electricity Board and Others
Modern Industries vs. Steel Authority of India Limited
State Bank's Staff Union (Madras Circle) vs. Union of India and Others
The State Financial Corporation is not liable under a decree for a defaulting borrower without compliance with notice requirements and jurisdictional procedures; attachment of its assets for past deb....
Post-liquidation, a financial institution retains the right to recover dues from guarantors, reaffirming that guarantees remain enforceable regardless of the principal debtor's discharge during insol....
The right of a Financial Corporation to recover dues from guarantors survives post-liquidation of the principal debtor, and such guarantees remain enforceable.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the Interest on Delayed Payment to Small Scale and Ancillary Industrial Undertakings Act, 1993 does not apply to transactions prior to its enf....
Guarantors remain jointly and severally liable for loan defaults regardless of the principal debtor's separate legal status, as established under Sections 29 and 31 of the State Financial Corporation....
The limitation period for recovery of money from a surety under the State Financial Corporation Act is three years, and failure to initiate proceedings within this period renders the claim barred by ....
The petitioner, as a secured creditor, can raise the claim for a share in the interest amount before the respondent No.1 as directed in the previous judgment.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.