SPA/427/2018
2025 Latest Caselaw 1932 UK

Uttarakhand High Court

SPA/427/2018 on 13 August, 2025

Author: Manoj Kumar Tiwari

Bench: Manoj Kumar Tiwari

              Office Notes,
             reports, orders
             or proceedings
SL.
      Date    or directions                  COURT'S OR JUDGE'S ORDERS
No.
             and Registrar's
               order with
               Signatures
                               SPA No. 427 of 2018
                               With
                               SPA No. 429 of 2018
                               Hon'ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.

Hon'ble Subhash Upadhyay, J.

1. Mr. Naresh Pant, learned counsel for the appellant.

2. None present for the respondents.

3. In the interest of justice, the delay in filing the appeals is hereby condonbed. Accordingly, delay condonation applications (CLMA No. 7784 of 2018 and CLMA No. 7782 of 2018) are allowed.

4. These intra-court appeals have been filed by U.P. Financial Corporation challenging the common judgment dated 14.02.2018 passed in WPMS No. 525 of 2012 and WPMS No. 2181 of 2012. By the impugned judgment, learned Single Judge, by relying upon the law declared by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Karnataka State Financial Corporation vs. N. Narasimahaiah & others reported in (2008) 5 SCC 176, held that the right available to State Financial Corporation under Section 29 of State Financial Corporation Act, 1951 is available only against defaulting industrial concerns and not against the surety. However, it was observed by learned Single Judge that respondent shall be at liberty to proceed against the writ petitioners, in accordance with law.

4. The view taken by learned Single Judge is supported by law of the land, as declared by the judgment stated above. The view taken by learned Single Judge is supported by subsequent judgment rendered by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case Subhransu Sekhar Padhi vs. Gunamani Swain & others, reported in 2014 (12) SCC 368.

5. Thus, we do not find any scope for interference with the impugned judgment. Both the appeals are, therefore, dismissed. However, appellant shall be at liberty to adopt such other modes of recovery, as are permissible under the law.

(Subhash Upadhyay, J.) (Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.) 13.08.2025

Aswal NITI RAJ SINGH

DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF

2.5.4.20=eacc6757ee7881e933ff8934f07477005aa85f9802a3a08b08d1369

ASWAL 512ea30f3, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=44EB54CBF00B7698CB6F10C2CE3D26F5C22DACF4F4610C1 FE58A58531726FBB0, cn=NITI RAJ SINGH ASWAL Date: 2025.08.13 21:42:32 -07'00'