Sreedhar Rao, J

The 1st respondent borrowed loan from the appellant. Respondents 2 and 3 are the guarantors. The respondents defaulted in repayment of the loan. The appellant filed a petition under Section f 31 (aa) of the State Financial Corporations Act (for short, the Act). The respondents filed objections that the District Court, Bangalore has no territorial jurisdiction and that too proceedings have to be launched in whose local jurisdiction the industrial concern carries one business, wholly or substantially, in view of the provisions contained in Section 31 of the Act.

2. In the instant case, the Learned District Judge has found that the contract between the appellant and the respondents 2 and 3 to invest jurisdiction in the Court at Bangalore is void since it is contrary to the provisions of Section 31 of the Act and that appellant is not carrying on any business in Bangalore.

3. The provisions of Section 46-B of the Act reads thus:

“Effect of Act on other laws:

The provisions of this Act and of any rules or orders made thereunder shall have effect notwithstanding anything inconsistent therewith contained in any other law for the time being in force or in the memo