SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1998 Supreme(Del) 136

D.K.JAIN, Y.K.SABHARWAL
RAJIV ANAND – Appellant
Versus
UNION OF INDIA – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
ARUN JAITLEY, ARUN KHOSLA, MUKUL TALVAR

Y. K. Sabharwal, J.

( 1 ) IN these petitions the main question which falls for determination is about the validity of Section 32-G of State Financial Corporation Act, 1951 (for short the Act ) as also about the true scope and ambit of this Section.

( 2 ) ONE of the contention urged on behalf of the petitioners also is that Section 32-G applies in respect of dues from an industrial concern and does not cover the case of dues from a surety. Yet another contention urged is that specifying the procedure contemplated by Section 32-G is a condition precedent for invoking the said section.

( 3 ) IN order to appreciate the questions it would be necessary to first briefly examine the scheme of some of the provisions of the Act.

( 4 ) THE object of the Act is to facilitate industrialisation of the country by financing medium and small scale industries. The Financial Corporations have been established as an extended arm of a Welfare State and there can be no doubt that its approach has to be public oriented and helpful to the industry and the lonee but that does not mean that such approach shall cause loss to the Corporations. At the same time, however, the Corporation is required to act fai
















Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top