{"id":235542,"date":"1994-12-14T00:00:00","date_gmt":"1994-12-13T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-bank-of-bikaner-jaipur-vs-national-iron-steel-rolling-on-14-december-1994"},"modified":"2016-10-31T05:30:41","modified_gmt":"2016-10-31T00:00:41","slug":"state-bank-of-bikaner-jaipur-vs-national-iron-steel-rolling-on-14-december-1994","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-bank-of-bikaner-jaipur-vs-national-iron-steel-rolling-on-14-december-1994","title":{"rendered":"State Bank Of Bikaner &amp; Jaipur vs National Iron &amp; Steel Rolling &#8230; on 14 December, 1994"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">State Bank Of Bikaner &amp; Jaipur vs National Iron &amp; Steel Rolling &#8230; on 14 December, 1994<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_citations\">Equivalent citations: 1995 SCC  (2)\t19, \t  JT 1995 (2)\t 14<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: M S V.<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_bench\">Bench: Manohar Sujata (J)<\/div>\n<pre>           PETITIONER:\nSTATE BANK OF BIKANER &amp; JAIPUR\n\n\tVs.\n\nRESPONDENT:\nNATIONAL IRON &amp; STEEL ROLLING CORPN. &amp; ORS..\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT14\/12\/1994\n\nBENCH:\nMANOHAR SUJATA V. (J)\nBENCH:\nMANOHAR SUJATA V. (J)\nAGRAWAL, S.C. (J)\nFAIZAN UDDIN (J)\n\nCITATION:\n 1995 SCC  (2)\t19\t  JT 1995 (2)\t 14\n 1994 SCALE  (5)249\n\n\nACT:\n\n\n\nHEADNOTE:\n\n\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n<p>1.   Leave granted.\n<\/p>\n<p>2.   The  appellant, namely, the State Bank of\tBikaner\t and<br \/>\nJaipur had given cash credit facilities to respondent No. 1,<br \/>\nNational Iron &amp; Steel Rolling Corporation.  Respondents 2 to<br \/>\n5  are the partners of respondent No. 1. As a  security\t for<br \/>\nrepayment of the amounts advanced to respondent No.1 by\t the<br \/>\nappellant-bank, respondent No.1 created a mortgage of  their<br \/>\nfactory premises situated at Industrial Area Bharatpur by  a<br \/>\nDeed  of  Mortgage dated 18.10.1977. They have\talso,  by  a<br \/>\nLetter\tof  Promise  dated 10.6.81, pledged  the  plant\t and<br \/>\nmachinery  installed in the said premises to the bank  as  a<br \/>\nsecurity for the said advances.\t There is also an  agreement<br \/>\nfor the pledge of movable dated 7.1.80 executed by the first<br \/>\nrespondent in favour of the appellant-bank.\n<\/p>\n<p>3. The appellant-bank filed Civil Suit NO. 5\/86 in the court<br \/>\nof  the Additional District Judge II, Bharatpur against\t the<br \/>\nrespondents for the recovery of a sum of Rs. 3,79,672\/-\t due<br \/>\nand  payable  under the above Case credit facility  and\t for<br \/>\nfuture interest @ 16.25% p.a. with quarterly rests.  In this<br \/>\nsuit  the appellant-bank also asked for the  realisation  of<br \/>\nthe mortgage security under order 34, Rule 4 of the Code  of<br \/>\ncivil procedure.\n<\/p>\n<p>4.   While  the\t suit  was  pending,  the  Commercial  Taxes<br \/>\nOfficer,  Bharatpur  got himself impleaded in  the  suit  on<br \/>\n18.5.90<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">16<\/span><br \/>\non the ground that he had a prior claim for the recovery  of<br \/>\na sum of Rs.1,19,122\/- as sales tax dues from respondent No.<br \/>\n1  and was entitled to realize it by sale of  the  mortgaged<br \/>\nproperty.\n<\/p>\n<p>5.   The property which is the subject-matter\t  of\t the<br \/>\nmortgage has been sold by auction  under  the orders of\t the<br \/>\ncourt for a sum of Rs.4,02,000\/- to one Smt.  Kamlesh  Gole.<br \/>\nUnder  the orders of the court the sale proceeds  have\tbeen<br \/>\ndeposited  in  court.  It was contended\t by  the  Commercial<br \/>\nTaxes  Officer,\t Bharatpur that the sales tax  dues  of\t the<br \/>\nfirst-respondent  were\tliable to be paid first out  of\t the<br \/>\nsale  proceeds.\t  The claim of the appellant-bank  could  be<br \/>\nsatisfied  only out of the balance amount.  The trial  court<br \/>\nby its Judgment and order dated 18.5.90 accepted this  claim<br \/>\nof  the Commercial Taxes Officer.  The Revision Petition  of<br \/>\nthe  appellant-bank was dismissed by the High Court  by\t the<br \/>\nimpugned  judgment and order.  Hence this appeal by  special<br \/>\nleave.\n<\/p>\n<p>6.   The  claim of the Commercial Taxes\t Officer,  Bharatpur<br \/>\nrests on the provisions of Section 11-AAAA of the  Rajasthan<br \/>\nSales Tax Act, 1954.  Section 11-AAAA has been introduced in<br \/>\nthe Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1954 by way of the an amendment<br \/>\nin 1989.  Section 1 1 -AAAA is as follows:-\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>\t      11-AAAA.\t Liability under this Act to be\t the<br \/>\n\t      first charge.  Notwithstanding anything to the<br \/>\n\t      contrary\tcontained  in any law for  the\ttime<br \/>\n\t      being  in force, any amount of  tax,  penalty,<br \/>\n\t      interest and any other sum, if any, payable by<br \/>\n\t      a\t dealer or any other person under this\tAct,<br \/>\n\t      shall  be the first charge on the property  of<br \/>\n\t      the dealer, or such person&#8221;.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>Under  this Section the amount of a sales tax or  any  other<br \/>\nsum  due and payable by a dealer or any other  person  under<br \/>\nthe Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1954, is a first charge on\t the<br \/>\nproperty of the dealer or of such person.  It is on  account<br \/>\nof the provisions of this Section that the Commercial  Taxes<br \/>\nOfficer\t claimed priority for the recovery of the sales\t tax<br \/>\ndues from the sale proceeds of the mortgaged property.\t The<br \/>\nappellant,  however,  contended that since the\tmortgage  in<br \/>\ntheir  favour  is prior in point of time, their\t claim\twill<br \/>\nhave precedence over the claim of the Sales Tax authorities.\n<\/p>\n<p>7.It  is,  therefore, necessary to consider  the  effect  of<br \/>\nSection\t 11-AAAA of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1954 on  an<br \/>\nexisting  mortgage in respect of the property of the  dealer<br \/>\nor  the person liable to pay sales tax or other\t sums  under<br \/>\nthe  Rajasthan\tSales  Tax Act, 1954.  Section\t100  of\t the<br \/>\nTransfer of Property Act deals with Charges on an  immovable<br \/>\nproperty which can be created either by an act of parties or<br \/>\nby  operation  of  law.\t It provides  that  where  immovable<br \/>\nproperty  of one person is made security for the payment  of<br \/>\nmoney to a mortgage, a charge is created on the property and<br \/>\nall  the  provisions in the Transfer of property  Act  which<br \/>\napply  to a simple mortgage shall, so far may be,  apply  to<br \/>\nsuch charge.  A mortgage on the other hand, is defined under<br \/>\nSection 58 of the Transfer of property Act as a transfer  of<br \/>\nan  interest In specific immovable property for the  purpose<br \/>\nof securing the payment of money advanced or to be  advanced<br \/>\nas set out therein.  The distinction between a mortgage\t and<br \/>\na  charge  was\tconsidered  by this Court  in  the  case  of<br \/>\n<a href=\"\/doc\/1064891\/\">Dattatreya Shanker Mote and others v. Anand Chintaman  Datar<br \/>\nand  others<\/a>  (1 974 2 SCC799). The Court  has  observed\t (at<br \/>\npages<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">17<\/span><br \/>\n806-807) that a charge is a wider term as it includes also a<br \/>\nmortgage,  in  that, every mortgage is a charge,  but  every<br \/>\ncharge is not a mortgage.  The Court has then considered the<br \/>\napplication  of\t the  second  part of  Section\t100  of\t the<br \/>\nTransfer  of  Property\tAct which inter alia  deals  with  a<br \/>\ncharge not being enforceable against a bona fide  transferee<br \/>\nof the property for value without notice of the charge.\t  It<br \/>\nhas held that the phrase &#8220;transferee of property&#8221; refers  to<br \/>\nthe  transferee\t of entire interest in the property  and  it<br \/>\ndoes  not  cover  the transfer of only an  interest  in\t the<br \/>\nproperty by way of a mortgage.\n<\/p>\n<p>8.   In the present case we have to consider whether\t the<br \/>\nstatutory first charge which  is  created under Section\t II\n<\/p>\n<p>-AAAA  of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act over the\tproperty  of<br \/>\nthe dealer or a person liable to pay sales tax and\/or  other<br \/>\ndues  under the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, is created  in\t re-<br \/>\nspect  of  the entire interest in the property or  only\t the<br \/>\nmortgagor&#8217;s  interest  in the property when the\t dealer\t has<br \/>\ncreated a mortgage on the property.  In other words, WI\t &#8216;II<br \/>\nthe  statutory\tfirst charge have priority over\t an  earlier<br \/>\nmortgage.   It was urged by Mi.\t Tarkunde,  learned  counsel<br \/>\nfor  the appellant-bank that at the time when the  statutory<br \/>\nfirst  charge  came  into existence,  there  was  already  a<br \/>\nmortgage  in respect of the same property.   Therefore,\t the<br \/>\nonly  property\twhich  was possessed by\t the  dealer  and\/or<br \/>\nperson\tliable to pay tax or other dues under the  Rajasthan<br \/>\nSales  Tax Act, was equity of redemption in respect  of\t the<br \/>\nproperty.   The first charge would operate, therefore,\tonly<br \/>\non the equity of redemption.  The argument though ingenious,<br \/>\nwill  have to be rejected.  Where a mortgage is\t created  in<br \/>\nrespect\t of  any property, undoubtedly, an interest  in\t the<br \/>\nproperty  is  carved out in favour of  the  mortgagee.\t The<br \/>\nmortgagor  is entitled to redeem his property on payment  of<br \/>\nthe  mortgage dues.  This does not, however, means that\t the<br \/>\nproperty  ceases to be the property of the  mortgagor.\t The<br \/>\ntitle\tto   the  property  remains  with   the\t  mortgagor.<br \/>\nTherefore,  when a statutory first charge is created on\t the<br \/>\nproperty of the dealer, the property subjected to the  first<br \/>\ncharge\tis entire property of the dealer.  The\tinterest  of<br \/>\nthe  mortgagee is not excluded from the first  charge.\t The<br \/>\nfirst  charge, therefore, which is created under Section  II\n<\/p>\n<p>-AAAA  of  the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act will operate  on\t the<br \/>\nproperty as a whole and not only on the equity of redemption<br \/>\nas urged by Mr. Tarkunde.\n<\/p>\n<p>9.   We find support for this conclusion in the observations<br \/>\nmade in Fisher and Lightwood&#8217;s Law of Mortgage, 10th Edn. at<br \/>\npage  33  where\t the statutory charges\tare  discussed.\t  In<br \/>\ndealing with a statutory charge in favour of rating authori-<br \/>\nties  in respect of rating surcharges for unused  commercial<br \/>\nbuildings  under  the General Rate Act, 1967, it  is  stated<br \/>\nthat &#8220;a statutory charge has priority to the interest of the<br \/>\nmortgagee under a mortgagee existing when the charge arose&#8221;.<br \/>\nIn  the\t case  of Westminister\tCity  Council  v.  Haymarket<br \/>\nPublishing  Ltd.  (1981\t 2 AER 555), the  English  Court  of<br \/>\nAppeals was required to consider whether a statutory  charge<br \/>\non  the\t property  under the General  Rate  Act\t would\thave<br \/>\npriority over a legal mortgage on the property existing when<br \/>\nthe  charge came into being.  It was argued that the  charge<br \/>\nwould  be  only\t on the mortgagor-owner&#8217;s  interest  in\t the<br \/>\nproperty  i.e.\ton  the equity\tof  redemption.\t  The  court<br \/>\nnegatived  this\t contention.  It held that  &#8220;charge  on\t the<br \/>\nland&#8221; imposed for an unpaid surcharge was not confined to  a<br \/>\ncharge on the<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">\t\t\t     18<\/span><br \/>\nowner&#8217;s interest in the premises when the charge arose,\t but<br \/>\nextended to a charge on all the estates and interests in the<br \/>\npremises  existing  when  the  charge  arose.\tThe   rating<br \/>\nauthority&#8217;s  charge  would  have priority  over\t the  bank&#8217;s<br \/>\ninterest as a mortgagee.\n<\/p>\n<p>10.  In the present case, the section creates a first charge<br \/>\non  the\t property,  thus  clearly  giving  priority  to\t the<br \/>\nstatutory  charge  over all other charges  on  the  property<br \/>\nincluding a mortgagee.\tThe submission, therefore, that\t the<br \/>\nstatutory  first  charge created by Section 11-AAAA  of\t the<br \/>\nRajasthan Sales Tax Act can operate only over the equity  of<br \/>\nredemption, cannot be accepted.\t The charge operates on\t the<br \/>\nentire property of the dealer including the interest of\t the<br \/>\nmortgagee therein.\n<\/p>\n<p>11. Looked at a little differently, the statute has  created<br \/>\na first charge on the property of the dealer.  What is meant<br \/>\nby  a  &#8220;first  charge&#8221;?\t Does it  have\tprecedence  over  an<br \/>\nearlier\t mortgage?   Now, as set out in\t Dattatreya  Shanker<br \/>\nMote  &#8216;s  case\t(supra), a Charge is a\tWider  term  than  a<br \/>\nmortgage.  It would cover within its ambit a mortgage  also.<br \/>\nTherefore,  when a first charge is created by  operation  of<br \/>\nlaw over any property, that charge will have precedence over<br \/>\nan existing mortgage.\n<\/p>\n<p>12.  No\t other\tcontention has been  urged  before  us.\t We,<br \/>\ntherefore, agree with the conclusion arrived at by the\tHigh<br \/>\nCourt.\t The  appeal  is,  therefore,  dismissed.   In\t the<br \/>\ncircumstances, however, there, will be no order as to costs.\n<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">20<\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Supreme Court of India State Bank Of Bikaner &amp; Jaipur vs National Iron &amp; Steel Rolling &#8230; on 14 December, 1994 Equivalent citations: 1995 SCC (2) 19, JT 1995 (2) 14 Author: M S V. Bench: Manohar Sujata (J) PETITIONER: STATE BANK OF BIKANER &amp; JAIPUR Vs. RESPONDENT: NATIONAL IRON &amp; STEEL ROLLING CORPN. &amp; [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[30],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-235542","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>State Bank Of Bikaner &amp; Jaipur vs National Iron &amp; Steel Rolling ... on 14 December, 1994 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-bank-of-bikaner-jaipur-vs-national-iron-steel-rolling-on-14-december-1994\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"State Bank Of Bikaner &amp; Jaipur vs National Iron &amp; Steel Rolling ... on 14 December, 1994 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-bank-of-bikaner-jaipur-vs-national-iron-steel-rolling-on-14-december-1994\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"1994-12-13T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-10-31T00:00:41+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"9 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-bank-of-bikaner-jaipur-vs-national-iron-steel-rolling-on-14-december-1994#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-bank-of-bikaner-jaipur-vs-national-iron-steel-rolling-on-14-december-1994\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"State Bank Of Bikaner &amp; Jaipur vs National Iron &amp; Steel Rolling &#8230; on 14 December, 1994\",\"datePublished\":\"1994-12-13T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-10-31T00:00:41+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-bank-of-bikaner-jaipur-vs-national-iron-steel-rolling-on-14-december-1994\"},\"wordCount\":1689,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Supreme Court of India\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-bank-of-bikaner-jaipur-vs-national-iron-steel-rolling-on-14-december-1994#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-bank-of-bikaner-jaipur-vs-national-iron-steel-rolling-on-14-december-1994\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-bank-of-bikaner-jaipur-vs-national-iron-steel-rolling-on-14-december-1994\",\"name\":\"State Bank Of Bikaner &amp; Jaipur vs National Iron &amp; Steel Rolling ... on 14 December, 1994 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"1994-12-13T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-10-31T00:00:41+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-bank-of-bikaner-jaipur-vs-national-iron-steel-rolling-on-14-december-1994#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-bank-of-bikaner-jaipur-vs-national-iron-steel-rolling-on-14-december-1994\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-bank-of-bikaner-jaipur-vs-national-iron-steel-rolling-on-14-december-1994#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"State Bank Of Bikaner &amp; Jaipur vs National Iron &amp; Steel Rolling &#8230; on 14 December, 1994\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"State Bank Of Bikaner &amp; Jaipur vs National Iron &amp; Steel Rolling ... on 14 December, 1994 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-bank-of-bikaner-jaipur-vs-national-iron-steel-rolling-on-14-december-1994","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"State Bank Of Bikaner &amp; Jaipur vs National Iron &amp; Steel Rolling ... on 14 December, 1994 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-bank-of-bikaner-jaipur-vs-national-iron-steel-rolling-on-14-december-1994","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"1994-12-13T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-10-31T00:00:41+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"9 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-bank-of-bikaner-jaipur-vs-national-iron-steel-rolling-on-14-december-1994#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-bank-of-bikaner-jaipur-vs-national-iron-steel-rolling-on-14-december-1994"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"State Bank Of Bikaner &amp; Jaipur vs National Iron &amp; Steel Rolling &#8230; on 14 December, 1994","datePublished":"1994-12-13T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-10-31T00:00:41+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-bank-of-bikaner-jaipur-vs-national-iron-steel-rolling-on-14-december-1994"},"wordCount":1689,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Supreme Court of India"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-bank-of-bikaner-jaipur-vs-national-iron-steel-rolling-on-14-december-1994#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-bank-of-bikaner-jaipur-vs-national-iron-steel-rolling-on-14-december-1994","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-bank-of-bikaner-jaipur-vs-national-iron-steel-rolling-on-14-december-1994","name":"State Bank Of Bikaner &amp; Jaipur vs National Iron &amp; Steel Rolling ... on 14 December, 1994 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"1994-12-13T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-10-31T00:00:41+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-bank-of-bikaner-jaipur-vs-national-iron-steel-rolling-on-14-december-1994#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-bank-of-bikaner-jaipur-vs-national-iron-steel-rolling-on-14-december-1994"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-bank-of-bikaner-jaipur-vs-national-iron-steel-rolling-on-14-december-1994#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"State Bank Of Bikaner &amp; Jaipur vs National Iron &amp; Steel Rolling &#8230; on 14 December, 1994"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/235542","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=235542"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/235542\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=235542"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=235542"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=235542"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}