1993 (9) TMI 332

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ourt below dated May 18, 1990, holding that the Sales Tax Department of the State of Rajasthan had a priority for recovering the amount found due from the respondents Nos. 1 to 5. The petitioner, which is a nationalised bank, filed a suit for recovery of money on the basis of mortgage deed and other security offered by the respondents Nos. 1 to 5 at the time of taking loan from the petitioner-b....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... to article 255 of the Constitution of India, is liable to be ignored. The contention of the petitioner's counsel is that since the aforesaid section had not been made retrospective, it did not apply to the petitioner's case where the suit was filed in 1986 and also that without obtaining a decree in a properly instituted suit, Commercial Taxes Officer could not enforce the right of priority. ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....aipur was the nationalised bank, but that does not debar the application of provisions of section 11-AAAA of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act to the present case. Lastly, counsel for the respondent No. 6 rightly contended that the judgment given by the court below at the most suffering from error of law, but as section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure cannot be invoked in such a case, the decision....