Limitation under IBC Section 9 turns on accrual of the right to apply, and an incorrect computation cannot defeat admission.

Section 238A of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 makes the Limitation Act, 1963 applicable to a Section 9 insolvency application, and limitation is computed with reference to Part II of the Schedule from the date the right to apply accrues. On the record, the invoices indicated a later accrual date, so the application was not time-barred on the basis adopted by the Adjudicating Authority. As the application was otherwise complete and the limitation objection failed, the rejection could not stand. The matter was remitted for reconsideration with notice to the corporate debtor, and admission of the application and commencement of CIRP were warranted if non-appearance continued.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether an application under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 was barred by limitation; (ii) whether the rejection of the Section 9 application was sustainable and the matter required admission for initiation of the corporate insolvency resolution process.

Issue (i): Whether an application under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 was barred by limitation.

Analysis: Section 238A of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 makes the Limitation Act, 1963 applicable. For an application under Section 9, the relevant period is to be computed with reference to Part II of the Schedule to the Limitation Act, 1963, and the right to apply accrues when the claim becomes actionable. The invoices on record showed a later accrual date, and the application could not be treated as time-barred on the footing adopted by the Adjudicating Authority.

Conclusion: The application under Section 9 was not barred by limitation.

Issue (ii): Whether the rejection of the Section 9 application was sustainable and the matter required admission for initiation of the corporate insolvency resolution process.

Analysis: Since the application was complete and the limitation objection failed, the rejection on that ground could not stand. The matter required reconsideration by the Adjudicating Authority with notice to the corporate debtor, and in the event of continued non-appearance, admission of the application and commencement of the corporate insolvency resolution process were warranted.

Conclusion: The impugned order was set aside and the matter was remitted for admission of the Section 9 application in accordance with law.

Final Conclusion: The appeal succeeded, the limitation objection was rejected, and the insolvency application was directed to proceed before the Adjudicating Authority.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the record shows a later accrual of the right to apply and Section 238A applies, a Section 9 insolvency application cannot be rejected as time-barred on an incorrect computation of limitation.

---