JAMMU ISPAT (PVT ) LTD Vs. STATE OF J&K

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE disputes in this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India relates to the efforts being made by the respondent, J&K State Industrial Development Corporation, (SIDCO, for short) for recovery of the loan advanced by it to the petitioner and the steps being initiated by it in terms of Section 29 of the State Financial Corporation Act for effecting recoveries.

(2.) MR . D.S. Thakur, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has relied upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Mahesh ChandraVs. Regional Manager, U.P financial Corporation and Ors reported in AIR 1993 S.C. 935, and submits that it was because of the acts of omission and commission of the SIDCO that the petitioner was driven to a stage where the unit became unviable and it is in this background that the repayment of the money taken by the unit could not be adhered to. Mr.Kohli, Learned Counsel for the respondents in turn has relied upon a subsequent Judgment of the Apex Court in the case of U.P. Financial Corporation Vs. M/S Gem Cap (India) Pvt. Ltd and others reported in AIR 1993 S.C. 1435.

(3.) I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.