JUDGMENT :

Biswajit Mohanty, J. - The controversy in this case revolves around the primary or secured debt vis-a-vis Crown debt/State dues.

2. Opposite party No. 2, a public limited company was incorporated as such in the year 1995 under the Companies Act. 1956. Opposite party No. 3 is its chairman and opposite party No. 4 is its managing director and opposite party Nos. 5 to 7 are its directors. Opposite party No. 2 availed several credit facilities w.e.f. the year 1998 from State Bank of India as well as from other borrowers. It also took credit facilities from a consortium of banks consisting of State Bank of India, UCO Bank, State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur, Oriental Bank of Commerce, Andhra Bank, Induslnd Bank and Allahabad Bank for carrying on its business. The total credit facilities availed by opposite party No. 2 from the consortium of lending banks at the time of filing of writ application stood at Rs. 602 crores out of which State Bank of India, for short, SBI alone had contributed Rs. 181.01 crores. In order to secure the above-noted credit facilities, opposite party No. 2 from time to time duly created equitable mortgage of its immovable properties in favour of banks, t