https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=275859 Sections 25, 29, 31 and 32 of the State Financial Corporations Act, 1951 were read as creating a special, expeditious recovery mechanism for the Corporation. Section 29 was treated as permitting action against property mortgaged or pledged to secure the loan, even where that property belonged to a third-party co-mortgagor or surety. Section 31 was understood to allow an application for sale of secured property, and Section 32 was regarded as procedural rather than restrictive. Because the proceedings affected a third party's secured property, a fair hearing and notice to that person were implied, and the challenge to the Corporation's action failed. en-us Thu, 03 Apr 1986 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 20 Oct 2018 12:25:47 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=275859 Sections 25, 29, 31 and 32 of the State Financial Corporations Act, 1951 were read as creating a special, expeditious recovery mechanism for the Corporation. Section 29 was treated as permitting action against property mortgaged or pledged to secure the loan, even where that property belonged to a third-party co-mortgagor or surety. Section 31 was understood to allow an application for sale of secured property, and Section 32 was regarded as procedural rather than restrictive. Because the proceedings affected a third party's secured property, a fair hearing and notice to that person were implied, and the challenge to the Corporation's action failed. Case-Laws Companies Law Thu, 03 Apr 1986 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=275859