Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the application under section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 was barred by limitation, and whether the financial creditor had established a subsisting debt and default warranting admission of the petition.
Analysis: The date of default was disputed on the footing that the account had become non-performing much earlier, but the Court found that limitation could be extended by subsequent acknowledgements of liability. The record showed continued reflection of the debt in the corporate debtor's accounts and an annual report entry acknowledging the outstanding liability. The Court treated such entries as an acknowledgement within the meaning of section 18 of the Limitation Act, 1963, and held that a fresh period of limitation runs from the date of acknowledgement if made before expiry of the original period. The Court also noted that the corporate debtor did not disprove the debt reflected in its books and that the conduct relating to the proposed one-time settlement did not negate the subsisting liability.
Conclusion: The petition was held to be within limitation, the default and debt were found to be established, and the application was admitted for commencement of corporate insolvency resolution process.