TaxTMI Login
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%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Join Channel
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: (i) Whether the application under section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 was barred by limitation; (ii) whether proceedings under the SARFAESI Act, 2002 or the alleged acknowledgment could extend or revive the limitation period.
Issue (i): Whether the application under section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 was barred by limitation.
Analysis: Limitation for an application under the Code is governed by Article 137 of the Limitation Act, 1963, and the period begins from the date of default. On the facts, the relevant date of default was taken as 30.06.2014, and the section 7 application filed on 08.11.2017 was beyond three years from that date.
Conclusion: The application under section 7 was barred by limitation.
Issue (ii): Whether proceedings under the SARFAESI Act, 2002 or the alleged acknowledgment could extend or revive the limitation period.
Analysis: Action under section 13(2) or section 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 is not a civil proceeding of the kind contemplated by section 14(2) of the Limitation Act, 1963, and therefore cannot be excluded for limitation purposes. The statement relied upon as acknowledgment was neither a valid written acknowledgment signed by the debtor nor made within the prescribed limitation period, so section 18 of the Limitation Act, 1963 was not attracted.
Conclusion: Neither section 14(2) nor section 18 of the Limitation Act, 1963 assisted the financial creditor.
Final Conclusion: The admission order was unsustainable, and the insolvency proceedings could not continue since the debt claim was time-barred.
Ratio Decidendi: For a section 7 application under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, limitation runs from the date of default, and neither SARFAESI enforcement steps nor an invalid or belated acknowledgment can extend or revive the prescribed period absent the statutory requirements of sections 14(2) or 18 of the Limitation Act, 1963.
TaxTMI 
