TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (12) TMI 100
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ment dated 1st February 2008 with respondent, Planet M Retail Limited - (corporate debtor), to conduct and manage the business of running a music concept store by name "Planet M" on behalf of operational creditor, in consideration of which, corporate debtor is liable to pay monthly conducting fee to the operational creditor. 2. Subsequently, at the request of the corporate debtor on the reasoning that business venture is not making profit, on 24th June, 2009, an addendum to agreement was entered whereby the monthly minimum guaranteed fee was scaled down to Rs. 7 lakhs for a period of only 26 months from 1st February, 2009 to 31st March, 2011 retrospectively. 3. According to appellant - operational creditor, the respondent - corporate debt....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tion: "11. The another contention of the operational creditor that since Arbitration Application was filed for the appointment of Arbitrator under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 and hence the recovery of debt is not barred by limitation, is far fetching in view of the fact that the Arbitration Application was dismissed on 4.4.2014 and that claim covered the debit notes raised from November, 2011 to the date of filing of Arbitration Application on 30.3.2012. In order to save limitation on this portion of the claim, the operational creditor should have obtained liberty to proceed against the corporate debtor but that is not the case herein, the Arbitration Application was dismissed without any liberty. In so far as....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e Trustee Ltd." of Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No.44/2017. 9. In spite of service of notice the respondent has not appeared to contest this appeal. The pleading made in the company petition and the appeal has not been controverted. 9. In 'Neelkanth Township and Construction Pvt. Ltd. vs. Urban Infrastructure Trustee Ltd.', similar plea was taken by the appellant of the said appeal. This Appellate Tribunal by Judgement dated 11th August, 2017 observed and held as follows: "The next ground taken on behalf of the appellant is that the claim of the respondent is bared by limitation, as the Debentures were matured between the year 2011 - 2013 is not based on Law. There is nothing on the record that Limitation Act, 2013 is applicable to ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....in this division." Three years When the right to apply accrues. 12. Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 has come into force with effect from 1st December, 2016. Therefore, the right to apply under I&B Code accrues only on or after 1st December, 2016 and not before the said date (1st December, 2016). As the right to apply under section 9 of I&B Code accrued to appellant since 1st December, 2016, the application filed much prior to three years, the said application cannot be held to be barred by limitation. 13. In so far as the application under section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 preferred by appellant, it has been specifically pleaded by the appellant and not disputed by the respondent that the appellant filed an ap....