Limitation and acknowledgement in IBC insolvency: NPA date governs default, and statutory filings need clear liability admission.

Limitation for a Section 7 IBC application runs from the date of default, treated here as the NPA date, and Article 137 applies from the time the right to apply first accrues; a recovery decree or pending recovery proceedings do not create a fresh limitation period for insolvency. The majority further held that statutory balance sheets and annual returns, filed under the Companies Act with recurring compliance obligations, do not by themselves amount to acknowledgement of debt under Section 18 of the Limitation Act unless they contain a clear admission of liability. On that basis, the insolvency application was treated as time-barred, while a separate opinion favoured examining such filings on their contents.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the application under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 was barred by limitation when the account had been classified as non-performing asset and a recovery decree had already been passed. (ii) Whether audited balance sheets and annual returns of the corporate debtor constituted acknowledgement of liability so as to extend limitation under Section 18 of the Limitation Act, 1963.

Issue (i): Whether the application under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 was barred by limitation when the account had been classified as non-performing asset and a recovery decree had already been passed.

Analysis: For an application under Section 7, the relevant trigger is default, and the residuary Article 137 of the Limitation Act, 1963 applies from the date when the right to apply first accrues. The date of default is the date of NPA, and neither pendency of recovery proceedings nor a decree for recovery shifts the starting point of limitation for insolvency proceedings. A decree may be executable for its own period, but it does not create a fresh date of default for invoking the insolvency process.

Conclusion: The application under Section 7 was barred by limitation.

Issue (ii): Whether audited balance sheets and annual returns of the corporate debtor constituted acknowledgement of liability so as to extend limitation under Section 18 of the Limitation Act, 1963.

Analysis: The majority held that statutory filing of balance sheets and annual returns under Section 92(4) of the Companies Act, 2013, with penal consequences under Sections 92(5) and 92(6), did not by itself amount to acknowledgement of debt. Since such filings are mandatory and recurring, treating them as automatic acknowledgements would virtually remove limitation in insolvency matters. The majority therefore declined to treat the balance sheets and annual returns as acknowledgements extending limitation.

Conclusion: Balance sheets and annual returns were not treated as acknowledgement of debt for extending limitation.

Final Conclusion: The insolvency application was held to be time-barred and was dismissed, with the admission order and all consequential insolvency measures set aside.

Ratio Decidendi: For a Section 7 application, limitation runs from the date of default or NPA and is governed by Article 137 of the Limitation Act, 1963, while compulsory statutory financial filings do not constitute acknowledgement of debt unless they contain a clear admission of liability within the meaning of Section 18 of the Limitation Act, 1963.

Dissenting Opinion: A separate opinion disagreed with the majority on balance sheets and annual returns, taking the view that such documents cannot be excluded as a matter of law and must be examined on their contents to determine whether they amount to acknowledgement of liability under Section 18 of the Limitation Act, 1963.

---