An application u/s 31 of the State Financial Corporations Act, 1951 is not a suit and any order passed by the District Judge while dealing with such an application does not amount to a decree, much less a decree for payment of money.

JUDGMENT :

A. Pasayat, J. - Since a dispute was raised about maintainability of the appeal without deposit of the amount disputed in appeal or furnishing of security in respect thereof subject to direction of the Court, and it is of seminal importance, the matter was heard at length.

2. The appeal is directed against an order passed by the learned District Judge, Sundargarh on an application filed by the Orissa State Financial Corporation (hereinafter referred to as 'the Corporation' u/s 31 of the State Financial Corporations Act, 1951 (Act 63 of 1951) (hsreinafter referred to as 'the Act')- The appeal has been filed u/s 32(9) of the Act.

3. According to Mr. M. M. Sahu, learned counsel appearing for the Corporation, the appeal was against a decree for payment of money and therefore, in terms of Order 41, Rule 1, Sub-rule (3) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (in shourt the Code') deposit of the amount in dispute or furnishing of security thereagainst as directed by the Court is obligated. Mr. N. Patra, learned counsel for the appellants, however, submits that the order passed by the learned District Judge does not amount to a decree for payment of money and therefore, the question of making any deposit or furnishing any security does not arise.

4. Section 31 of the Act is a special provision for enforcement of claims by the State Financial Corporations. Where an "industrial concern'" as defined in Section 2(c) of the Act, in breach of any agreement makes any default in repayment of any loan or advance or any installment thereof in meeting 'its obligation in relation to any guarantee given by the Corporation or otherwise fails to comply with the terms of its agreement with the Financial Corporation, or, where the Financial Corpo ration requires an industrial concern to make immediate repayment of any loan or advance u/s 30 and the industrial concern fails to make such repayment, then, without prejudice to the provisions of Section 29 of the Act and of Section 69 of the Transfer of Property Act, (4 of 1882), any officer of Financial Corporation, generally or specially authorised by the Board in this behalf, may apply to the District Judge within the limits of whose jurisdiction the industrial concern carries on whole or a substantial part of its business, for. one or more of the reliefs as enumerated in Section 31. One of the reliefs is for sale of the property pledged, mortgaged, hypothecated or assigned to the Financial Corporation as security for the loan or advance. In terms of Section 32(1), where an application is for the reliefs mentioned in Clauses (a) and (c) of Sub-section (1) of Section 31, the District Judge shall pass an ad interim order attaching the -security, or so much of the property of the industrial concern as would, on being sold realise in his estimate an amount equivalent in value to the outstanding liability of the industrial concern to the Financial Corporation together with the costs of the proceedings taken u/s 31. In terms- of Sub-section (5) of Section 32, the District Judge after giving due notice to the defaulter can make the ad interim order absolute and direct sale of the attached property or transfer the management of the industrial corcern to the Financial Corporation or confirm the injunction.

5. A conspectus of the relevant provisions of Sections 31 and 32 rnakes it clear that Section 31 deals with the power of the District Judge to enforce claims by the Financial Corporation in respect of deta. Its for repayment of amounts due to the Corporation.' An application u/s 31 of the Act is not a suit. .In AIR 1973 SC 1765 : Gujarat State Financial Corporation v. Watson Manufacturing Co. Pvt, Ltd., it was held that an application for any of the reliefs that can be granted under the Act is not ?. plaint in a suit for recovery of mortgage loan by sale of mortgaged property, and it is not even akin .to a suit by a mortgagee to recover mortgage money by sale of mortgaged property. It was held that the Cor