Letters Patent Appeal No.1043 OF 1999 ----- Against Judgment and order dated 28.7.1999 passed by a learned single Judge of this Court in C.W.J.C.No.11043 of 1994. ----- MOST.MEERA TIWARY & ORS. --------- Appellants Versus THE BIHAR STATE FINANCIAL CORPORATION & ORS. --------- Respondents ----- For the Appellants : Mr.J.P.Shukla,Sr.Adv. with Mr.R.K.Shukla,Adv. For the Respondents: Mr.Mukesh Kr.Thakur,Adv. ----- P R E S E N T THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BARIN GHOSH THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANANDAN SINGH Barin Ghosh & Jayanandan Singh,JJ: Appellant filed a writ petition seeking a direction upon respondent Bihar State Financial Corporation not to sell the assets being the subject matter of the writ petition. The assets which were being proposed to be sold were part of an industrial undertaking promoted by the appellant and financed by the Corporation. The Corporation exercised its power under section 29 of the State Financial Corporation Act, 1951 for the purpose of effecting sale of such assets and for that matter issued an advertisement. At that stage, appellant filed the writ petition, but before the writ petition could be taken up for hearing, the sale of the assets pursuant to the - 2 - said advertisement was effected. On that ground principally the writ petition was dismissed by the order impugned in the present appeal. 2. While the appellant preferred the instant appeal, the buyer of the concerned assets could not pay the instalments which he agreed to pay to the Corporation towards consideration for sale of the said assets, and as a result, the Corporation re-exercised its power under section 29 of the Act and once again took steps for sale of the self- same assets and for that purpose issued an advertisement. Appellant at that stage acted upon the said advertisement and gave an offer to purchase the said assets. By reason of the said conduct on the part of the appellant, present appeal has become totally infructuous, for the appellant has accepted transfer of the assets in favour of the purchaser and re-exercise of power under section 29 of the Act by the Corporation as against the purchaser. In these circumstances, the present appeal having become infructuous, the same is dismissed. 3. The appellant purports to contend that his offer pursuant to the advertisement has not yet been considered by the Corporation. 4. The cause of action of the appellant against the Corporation arising out of said advertisement has nothing to do with the present appeal. In the circumstances, such cause of action cannot be - 3 - clubbed with the present appeal. For that the appellant would be required to take independent separate measure. Liberty therefore is reserved. (Barin Ghosh,J.) (Jayanandan Singh, J.) Patna High Court 23rd June, 2008 N.A.F.R./Pradeep