<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2021 (5) TMI 609 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL , NEW DELHI BENCH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=407730</link>
    <description>A Section 9 insolvency application under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 is stated to fail where documentary correspondence shows a genuine pre-existing dispute before the demand notice, including objections on delay, defective performance, termination, and counterclaims. The note also states that limitation runs from the accrual of the right to apply, with a three-year period under Article 137 of the Limitation Act, 1963; termination of the contract was treated as the last cause of action, and later conduct did not extend time or amount to sufficient acknowledgement. On that basis, the petition was treated as not maintainable and time-barred.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 03 May 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 20 May 2021 08:29:28 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=644694" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2021 (5) TMI 609 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL , NEW DELHI BENCH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=407730</link>
      <description>A Section 9 insolvency application under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 is stated to fail where documentary correspondence shows a genuine pre-existing dispute before the demand notice, including objections on delay, defective performance, termination, and counterclaims. The note also states that limitation runs from the accrual of the right to apply, with a three-year period under Article 137 of the Limitation Act, 1963; termination of the contract was treated as the last cause of action, and later conduct did not extend time or amount to sufficient acknowledgement. On that basis, the petition was treated as not maintainable and time-barred.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Insolvency and Bankruptcy</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 03 May 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=407730</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>