P.R. Ramachandra Menon, J.

Whether the amount payable to the 4th respondent under the Toddy Workers' Welfare Fund Act is having any 'priority' over the debt due to the petitioner Bank, in favour of whom, mortgage over the property in question was created much earlier and further when a positive decree was obtained by the Bank, pursuant to which the property was transferred to the name of the secured creditor, is the point for consideration. The issue requires a closer scrutiny in view of the rival submissions made from the part of the learned Government Pleader on one side that, it is squarely covered in favour of the respondents as per the recent decision rendered by a learned Judge of this Court in State of Kerala v. Bank of India 2008 (4) KHC 691 : 2009 (1) KLT 105 : ILR 2008 (4) Ker. 506 white the same is strongly rebutted from the part of the petitioner Bank, placing reliance on the decision rendered by the Apex Court in Union of India and Others v. SICOM Limited and Another 2009 KHC 4022 :2009 (2) SCC 121 : ILR 2009 (1) Ker. 763 : 2009 (2) KLT SN 23 and several other verdicts on the point. The essential facts required for effective adjudication of this case are such