( 1 ) IN this case the Official Liquidator haschallenged the sale of certain properties of the company in respectwhereof Official Liquidator had been appointed as the Provisionalliquidator, purported to have been affected by Delhi Financialcorporation limited (hereinafter referred to as "the DFC") inexercise of its powers under Section 29 of the State Financial Corporations Act.

( 2 ) AFTER the arguments, I was informed that similar controversyis pending decision by the Hon ble Supreme Court and I should awaitthe outcome thereof. Now, counsels have pointed out that thehon ble Supreme Court has since decided the matter in the case ofindustrial Credit and Investment Corporation of India Ltd. Vs. M/s. Srinivas Agencies and Ors. . reported as 1996 (3) Supreme 400 ). Mr. Nayar, counsel for the Official Liquidator, concedes that thecontroversy before the Hon ble Supreme Court was not identicalwith the questions arising in the present case as would appear fromthe discussion appearing hereinafter.

( 3 ) BRIEFLY stating the facts of the case are as under :-The Company "disco Electronics Ltd. " (hereinafter referredto as "disco") had created a mortgage in favour of thedelhi