JUDGMENT :

A.K. Rath, J.

Defendants are the appellants against the reversing judgment.

2. Case of the plaintiff-respondent was that it was a partnership firm. The firm availed a loan from the defendants in the year 1961 to establish a cold storage. Due to disturbance of electricity supply, the firm could not be carried on business and became sick. The defendants issued a notice under Sec.29 of the State Financial Corporations Act (in short, "S.F.C. Act") in the year 1986. Plaintiff filed a suit in the court of Munsif, Puri for permanent injunction. The defendants initiated a proceeding under Sec.31 of the S.F.C Act in the court of the learned District Judge, Puri. The same was withdrawn to initiate a fresh proceeding under Secs.29 and 31 of the S.F.C. Act. Thereafter, the defendants issued notice under Sec.29 of the S.F.C Act to recover the dues of Rs.7,10,965.05 ps. The plaintiff requested the defendants to accept an amount of Rs.5,00,000/- and settle the outstanding dues, but the same was turned down. The claim is time barred. With this factual scenario, the plaintiff instituted the suit for declaration that the defendants are not entitled to recover the outstanding dues since the s