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 the debt claimed on the basis of the arbitral award was a financial debt and could be relied upon for admission of the insolvency application despite the challenge to the award.
Issue (i): whether the application under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 was barred by limitation.
Analysis: The default arose out of the parties' arrangement and the arbitral award was passed on 20.02.2019. The application under Section 7 was filed on 30.05.2022. The period of limitation was held to be governed by the extension granted during the Covid-19 period by the Supreme Court. The subsequent dismissal of the challenge to the award also negatived the plea that the claim was stale.
Conclusion: The application was held to be within limitation and the plea of bar of limitation was rejected.
Issue (ii): whether the debt claimed on the basis of the arbitral award was a financial debt and could be relied upon for admission of the insolvency application despite the challenge to the award.
Analysis: The amount claimed was founded on the memorandum of understanding and the arbitral award, both of which acknowledged the liability. The award had already been upheld in the challenge before the District Court, the interim protection from the High Court stood vacated for non-compliance, and the further challenge before the Supreme Court did not succeed. In these circumstances, the award was treated as operative and executable, and the debt was treated as falling within the definition of financial debt.
Conclusion: The debt was held to be a financial debt and the insolvency admission was sustained.
Final Conclusion: No ground was found to interfere with the admission order, and the insolvency appeal was rejected.
Ratio Decidendi: An insolvency application based on an arbitral award may be treated as within limitation where the relevant period is saved by the Supreme Court's extension of limitation, and a debt acknowledged under the underlying transaction and confirmed by an executable award can form the basis for admission when the challenge to the award has failed.
TaxTMI 
