<?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>2023 (10) TMI 1171 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , PRINCIPAL BENCH , NEW DELHI-LB</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=444948</link>
    <description>An operational creditor&#039;s Section 9 IBC application was held time-barred because the period spent in an earlier civil suit could not be excluded under Section 14 of the Limitation Act. Section 14 applies only where the prior proceeding was pursued with due diligence and in good faith before a forum unable to entertain it for defect of jurisdiction or a similar cause; here, the suit was voluntarily withdrawn by the creditor without liberty to file afresh, so that condition was not met. Section 5 also did not assist, as sufficient cause for condonation was not shown. The insolvency application was therefore dismissed as barred by limitation.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 20 Oct 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 26 Oct 2023 10:16:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=730325" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (10) TMI 1171 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , PRINCIPAL BENCH , NEW DELHI-LB</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=444948</link>
      <description>An operational creditor&#039;s Section 9 IBC application was held time-barred because the period spent in an earlier civil suit could not be excluded under Section 14 of the Limitation Act. Section 14 applies only where the prior proceeding was pursued with due diligence and in good faith before a forum unable to entertain it for defect of jurisdiction or a similar cause; here, the suit was voluntarily withdrawn by the creditor without liberty to file afresh, so that condition was not met. Section 5 also did not assist, as sufficient cause for condonation was not shown. The insolvency application was therefore dismissed as barred by limitation.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Insolvency and Bankruptcy</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 20 Oct 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=444948</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>