Supreme Court Overturns NCLAT, Extends Limitation Period, Directs Parties to NCLT for Further Proceedings

The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, overturning the NCLAT judgment, and held that the application under Section 7 of the IBC was filed within the prescribed period of limitation. The court determined that the OTS proposal extended the limitation period, acknowledging the jural relationship between the parties. Parties were directed to appear before the NCLT for further proceedings, expediting the legal process and disposing of any pending applications.

---

---

Issues involved:
The issues involved in the judgment are related to the classification of credit facilities as Non-Performing Assets (NPA), initiation of proceedings under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC), the acceptance of One Time Settlement (OTS) proposal, and the application of Section 18 of the Limitation Act to extend the period of limitation.

Classification of Credit Facilities as NPA:
The Corporate Debtor had obtained credit facilities from the Bank of India, which were declared as Non-Performing Assets (NPA) due to defaults, leading to outstanding balances towards the principal amount, interest, and penalty.

Initiation of Proceedings under IBC:
The Bank of India initiated proceedings against the Corporate Debtor under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) by filing an application under Section 7, which was contested on the ground of limitation but rejected by the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT).

Acceptance of OTS Proposal and Limitation Act:
The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) accepted the plea that the proceedings were barred by limitation, but the Supreme Court disagreed, stating that the One Time Settlement (OTS) proposal dated 01.06.2016 extended the period of limitation as it acknowledged the liability and jural relationship between the parties.

Application of Section 18 of the Limitation Act:
The Supreme Court held that Section 18 of the Limitation Act applies to IBC proceedings and requires an acknowledgment indicating the jural relationship without the need for a promise to pay. The court emphasized that the OTS proposal submitted within three years from the date of NPA declaration extended the period of limitation.

Conclusion:
The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, setting aside the NCLAT judgment, and held that the application under Section 7 of the IBC was filed within the prescribed period of limitation. The parties were directed to appear before the NCLT for further proceedings, and any pending applications were disposed of to expedite the legal process.

---