JUDGMENT 1. - The order dated Octobet 16, 2001 of the Recovery Officer, Debt Recovery Tribunal Jaipur (for short DRT) is under challenge in the instant application. 2. A Company, Rajasthan Woolen Limited was directed to be wound up by this Court vide order dated September 18, 1987. During the pendency of the winding up proceedings the Official Liquidator (for short OL) realised a sum of Rs, 6,57,635.65 from the sale of furniture, shoddy yarn, rags and woolen waste etc. Sum of Rs. 9395 was also realised afterwards. The realised amount was invested by the OL in FDR with the Corporation Bank (State). The State Bank is a secured creditor. The FDRs were directed to be made on the request of the State Bank itself. 3. The State Bank filed a recovery application in DRT for the recovery of its dues as secured creditor as against the company in liquidation and the Guarantors. The DRT allowed the recovery application on August 14, 1996 and passed decree for a sum of Rs. 50,87,021.70 with interest. 4. It is contended by the learned counsel for the OL that realising the securities outside the winding up proceedings is against the law, In Allahabad Bank vs. Canara Bank AIR 2000 SC 1535 it was held that every creditor has a right to appropriately get the share of sale proceeds. Reliance is also placed on International Coach Builders Ltd. Vs. Karnataka State Finance Corporation (2003) 10 SCC 482 and B. Shoes Ltd. Vs. Indian Overseas Bank (Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No. 3636/2003 Order dated 14.11.2003). 5. Per contra learned counsel for the State Bank canvassed that Section 34 of Recovery of Debts due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act 1993 (for short RDB Act) overrides the Companies Act, to the extent there is anything inconsistent between the Acts. Reliance is placed on Allahabad Bank Vs. Canara Bank (2000) 4 SCC 406 . 6. I have pondered over the submissions. 7. In B. Shoes Ltd. Vs. Indian Overseas Bank (supra) their Lordships of the Supreme Court granted leave and framed following question- "Whether the Debt Recovery Tribunal can direct sale of assets of a company which has been wound up and the Official Liquidator is appointed." 8. 6. I have pondered over the submissions. 7. In B. Shoes Ltd. Vs. Indian Overseas Bank (supra) their Lordships of the Supreme Court granted leave and framed following question- "Whether the Debt Recovery Tribunal can direct sale of assets of a company which has been wound up and the Official Liquidator is appointed." 8. Looking to the fact that issue involved in the instant matter is directly related to the question framed by the Apex Court, I direct that the State Bank shall not utilise the amount of FDRs by the O.L. with it till further orders. The application stands disposed of. The parties shall be at liberty to file applications seeking modification of this order after the decision in B. Shoes Ltd. vs. Indian Overseas Bank (Supra).Application Disposed Of. *******