NCLAT Chennai Dismisses Appeal Against CIRP Initiation for Agricultural Loan Default — Limitation Period for Section 7 Application Computed from Date of Default in Repayment Schedule, Not from Date of NPA Classification. The date of default under Section 7 of IBC is the date when the debt became due as per the repayment schedule, and the application filed within three years from the last repayment schedule is within limitation.

Tribunals: National Company Law Appellate Tribunal Bench: CHENNAI In Favour of Prosecution
  • 95
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The appeal was filed by Kurien Thomas, the suspended director of Koravampady Estates and Enterprises Private Limited (the Corporate Debtor), against the order of the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), Kochi Bench, which admitted an application under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) filed by The South Indian Bank (the Financial Creditor). The Corporate Debtor was incorporated in 1998 and engaged in growing agricultural crops like coffee, pepper, and cardamom. The bank sanctioned a working capital facility limit of INR 312.99 lakhs on 05.10.2015, renewable annually, and a Cash Credit Agriculture Loan (CCAL) was sanctioned. The Corporate Debtor executed an Agreement of Hypothecation and a demand promissory note on 08.10.2015, an earmarking agreement on 09.10.2015, and a Memorandum of Deposit of Title Deeds (MOTD) on 13.10.2015. The credit facilities were renewed and sanctioned on 24.09.2018 and 14.12.2020. The Corporate Debtor defaulted in repayment, and the bank classified the account as NPA on 31.03.2019. The bank filed a Section 7 application on 28.02.2022, which was admitted by the NCLT. The appellant challenged the admission on the ground of limitation, arguing that the application was filed beyond three years from the date of default, which should be the date of NPA classification. The NCLAT examined the issue and held that the date of default for limitation purposes is the date when the debt became due and payable as per the repayment schedule, not the NPA classification date. The NCLAT noted that the last repayment schedule was on 14.12.2020, and the application was filed on 28.02.2022, within three years from that date. Therefore, the application was within limitation. The NCLAT also held that Section 5 of the Limitation Act is not applicable to Section 7 applications. The appeal was dismissed, and the order of the NCLT was upheld.

Headnote

A) Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code - Section 7 Application - Limitation - Date of Default - The date of default for computing limitation under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 is the date when the debt became due and payable as per the repayment schedule, and not the date of classification of the account as Non-Performing Asset (NPA) by the bank. The NPA classification is a regulatory requirement and does not determine the actual date of default for limitation purposes. (Paras 10-12)

B) Limitation Act, 1963 - Article 137 - Application to Section 7 of IBC - The limitation period for filing an application under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 is three years from the date of default, as per Article 137 of the Limitation Act, 1963. The application must be filed within three years from the date when the right to apply accrues, i.e., the date of default in repayment. (Paras 10-12)

C) Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code - Section 7 - Condonation of Delay - Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, which allows for condonation of delay, is not applicable to applications under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. Therefore, if the application is filed beyond the three-year limitation period, it is liable to be dismissed as time-barred. (Para 12)

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the application under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 filed by the Financial Creditor was barred by limitation, and whether the date of default should be computed from the date of NPA classification or from the date of the last repayment schedule.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The appeal is dismissed. The order of NCLT, Kochi Bench, admitting the Section 7 application is upheld. The date of default is the date when the debt became due as per the repayment schedule, not the NPA classification date. The application was filed within three years from the last repayment schedule on 14.12.2020, hence within limitation.

Law Points

  • Limitation under Section 7 of IBC
  • 2016 computed from date of default in repayment schedule
  • not from NPA classification date
  • Application of Article 137 of Limitation Act
  • 1963
  • Condonation of delay under Section 5 of Limitation Act not applicable to Section 7 applications
  • Agricultural loan default
  • Hypothecation agreement
  • Memorandum of Deposit of Title Deeds
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2024 LawText (NCLAT) (01) 39

Company Appeal (AT) (CH) (Ins) No. 07/2025 (IA Nos. 45, 46 & 47/2025)

0000-00-00

Justice Sharad Kumar Sharma (Member (Judicial))

Mr. Ajeesh Kumar S & Mr. Srihari S (for Appellant), Mr. M.L. Ganesh (for Respondent 1)

Kurien Thomas, The Suspended Director of Koravampady Estates and Enterprises Private Limited

1. The South Indian Bank, 2. Mr. Jasin Jose

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Appeal against admission of Section 7 application under IBC for initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) against the Corporate Debtor.

Remedy Sought

The appellant sought to set aside the order of NCLT admitting the Section 7 application on the ground that it was barred by limitation.

Filing Reason

The appellant contended that the Section 7 application was filed beyond the three-year limitation period from the date of default, which he argued was the date of NPA classification (31.03.2019).

Previous Decisions

The NCLT, Kochi Bench, admitted the Section 7 application filed by the Financial Creditor on 28.02.2022, leading to the present appeal.

Issues

Whether the Section 7 application was barred by limitation? What is the relevant date of default for computing limitation under Section 7 of IBC?

Submissions/Arguments

Appellant argued that the date of default is the date of NPA classification (31.03.2019) and the application filed on 28.02.2022 is beyond three years, hence time-barred. Respondent argued that the date of default is the date of last repayment schedule (14.12.2020) and the application is within limitation.

Ratio Decidendi

The date of default for computing limitation under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 is the date when the debt became due and payable as per the repayment schedule, and not the date of classification of the account as Non-Performing Asset (NPA). The limitation period of three years under Article 137 of the Limitation Act, 1963 runs from the date of default in repayment, and Section 5 of the Limitation Act is not applicable to Section 7 applications.

Judgment Excerpts

The date of default for the purposes of limitation under Section 7 of the IBC is the date when the debt became due and payable as per the repayment schedule, and not the date of classification of the account as NPA. The application under Section 7 was filed on 28.02.2022, which is within three years from the last repayment schedule on 14.12.2020, and hence is within limitation.

Procedural History

The Financial Creditor (The South Indian Bank) filed an application under Section 7 of the IBC before the NCLT, Kochi Bench, on 28.02.2022, seeking initiation of CIRP against the Corporate Debtor. The NCLT admitted the application. The suspended director of the Corporate Debtor filed an appeal before the NCLAT, Chennai, challenging the admission on the ground of limitation. The NCLAT dismissed the appeal, upholding the NCLT order.

Acts & Sections

  • Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016: Section 7
  • Limitation Act, 1963: Article 137, Section 5
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Acquits Accused in Robbery Case Due to Inconsistent Evidence and Non-Applicability of Section 397 IPC. The Court held that Section 397 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, applies only to the offender who uses a deadly weapon, and the benefi...
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Dismisses Appeals by Acquiring Body in Land Acquisition Compensation Cases — Previous Awards and Potential Value Upheld as Valid Basis for Market Value Determination Under Land Acquisition Act, 1894.