NCLAT Upholds Insolvency Process Against Corporate Debtor in South Indian Bank Case

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal upheld the initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process against a Corporate Debtor by 'South Indian Bank Ltd.' The appeal challenging the process was dismissed as the application under Section 7 was found not time-barred despite being filed beyond the three-year period. The absence of a record of default enclosed as required by Section 7(3)(b) was also addressed, with the Tribunal ruling in favor of the Respondent Bank based on evidence presented, including an email and letter acknowledging dues. The authenticity of the documents was upheld, and the appeal was dismissed with no costs imposed.

---

---

Issues:
1. Barred by limitation under Section 7.
2. Lack of record of default enclosed under Section 7(3)(b).

Analysis:
The judgment by the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi pertains to an appeal challenging the initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process against a Corporate Debtor by 'South Indian Bank Ltd.' The Appellant, a Promoter, raised two grounds for challenge. Firstly, it was contended that the application under Section 7 was time-barred. The account of the Corporate Debtor was declared a Non-Performing Asset (NPA) on 31st December, 2015, and the application was filed on 10th April, 2019, beyond the three-year period.

The second ground challenged the absence of a record of default enclosed as required by Section 7(3)(b). The Respondent Bank's counsel relied on an email and a subsequent letter received in May 2016 to argue that the Appellant acknowledged the dues, invoking Section 18 of the Limitation Act, 1963. The email and letter revealed the Appellant's acknowledgment of dues amounting to Rs. 220 Crores, which later increased to Rs. 250 Crores with interest. The Appellant, however, denied the authenticity of the email and letter, claiming they were forged.

The Bank presented evidence, including the cover through which the letter was dispatched, validating the authenticity of the email dated 2nd May, 2016. The Tribunal concluded that the email was genuine, dismissing the Appellant's claim of forgery. Additionally, it was noted that the Appellant, despite being in jail in Dubai for defaulting on payments to creditors there, had sworn an affidavit in India, indicating a pattern of habitual default.

Upon review of the records, the Tribunal found sufficient evidence supporting the existence of a default, leading to the Adjudicating Authority's correct admission of the application under Section 7. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed, with no costs imposed.

---