Limitation for Section 9 IBC claims depends on a clear debt acknowledgment; ambiguous emails will not extend time.

An operational creditor's Section 9 IBC application was held time-barred because it was filed more than three years after the pleaded default date. The emails relied on from November 2019 did not amount to a clear acknowledgment of debt under Section 18 of the Limitation Act, as the corporate debtor stated that no salary was pending and the later correspondence did not expressly admit liability. Without a valid acknowledgment, limitation ran from the original date of default under Article 137, and the application could not be maintained.

---

---

Issues: Whether the operational creditor's application under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 was barred by limitation, and whether the emails exchanged in November 2019 constituted an acknowledgment of debt extending limitation under Section 18 of the Limitation Act, 1963.

Analysis: The application was filed on 16.03.2020, while the pleaded date of default was 31.12.2016. The alleged acknowledgment was sought to be derived from emails dated 21.11.2019. On reading the correspondence, the communication from the corporate debtor stated that no salary was pending as per the office note, and the subsequent exchange did not amount to a clear admission of liability. There was no other document showing acknowledgment of the debt within the meaning of Section 18. In the absence of a valid acknowledgment, the claim had to be tested with reference to the original date of default and the three-year limitation period under Article 137 of the Limitation Act, 1963.

Conclusion: The application was barred by limitation and could not be maintained.

---