Tribunal Dismisses Corporate Debtor's Appeal Over Insolvency Application, Upholds Limitation Period Compliance.

The Tribunal dismissed the appeal filed by the Corporate Debtor against the admission of an application under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. The appeal was deemed not maintainable under Section 61 due to a precedent set by the SC. The Tribunal determined that the application was within the limitation period, governed by Article 137 of the Limitation Act, 1963. The argument for applying Article 18 was rejected as it pertains to suits, not insolvency proceedings. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed on grounds of maintainability and merit, with no costs awarded.

---

---

Issues:
- Appeal against admission of application under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016.
- Time-barred application filed after more than three years.
- Maintainability of the appeal under Section 61.
- Application of the Limitation Act, 1963.
- Applicability of Article 137 of the Limitation Act, 1963.
- Applicability of Article 18 of the Limitation Act, 1963.

Analysis:

The appeal was filed by a Corporate Debtor against the order admitting an application under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. The main argument presented was that the application was time-barred as it was filed more than three years after the cause of action, which was claimed to have occurred on 9th May, 2012. The Respondent contended that the last payment was made in 2013, and correspondence regarding payment continued thereafter. However, the Tribunal did not delve into the question of delay as it found the appeal itself to be not maintainable under Section 61 due to a Supreme Court decision in Innoventive Industries Ltd. v. ICICI Bank 143 SCL 625.

Regarding the application of the Limitation Act, 1963, the Tribunal noted that even if the Act was applicable, Article 137 (Part II - 'other applications') would govern the case, prescribing a three-year time limit from the date the right to apply accrued to the Appellant. Since the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code came into force on 1st December, 2016, the right to file the application under Section 9 accrued from that date, and the application was found to be within the limitation period.

The Senior Counsel for the Appellant argued that Article 18 of the Limitation Act, 1963 should apply as the matter pertained to the 'price of work done by the plaintiff for the defendant.' However, the Tribunal ruled that Article 18, being in Part 1 of the Limitation Act, 1963, was not applicable in this case, which was not a 'suit' or a 'recovery proceeding' under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code.

Ultimately, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal on grounds of maintainability and merit, finding that no case had been made out for interference with the impugned order dated 9th June, 2018. The appeal was accordingly dismissed with no costs awarded.

---