Section 7 insolvency applications follow residuary limitation under Article 137, not Article 62, and time-barred debts are not revived.

An application under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 is governed by the residuary Article 137 of the Limitation Act, 1963, not Article 62, because Article 62 applies only to suits to enforce payment of money secured by mortgage or charge upon immovable property. Limitation under Article 137 begins when the right to apply accrues, and the Code does not revive debts already time-barred. On the facts noted, the date of default was 21.07.2011 and the Section 7 application filed in 2017 was beyond limitation.

---

---

Issues: Whether an application under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 is governed by Article 62 or Article 137 of the Limitation Act, 1963, and whether the application was barred by limitation.

Analysis: Article 62 applies to suits to enforce payment of money secured by a mortgage or otherwise charged upon immovable property, and not to an application under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. The application therefore falls within the residuary Article 137 of the Limitation Act, 1963, under which limitation begins to run when the right to apply accrues. Since the date of default was 21.07.2011, the limitation period expired before the Section 7 application was filed in 2017. The Code cannot be interpreted to revive debts that were already time-barred.

Conclusion: The Section 7 application was time-barred under Article 137 of the Limitation Act, 1963, and the view that Article 62 applied was rejected.

Ratio Decidendi: An application under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 is governed by the residuary Article 137 of the Limitation Act, 1963, and not by Article 62, which is confined to suits.

---