NCLAT Dismisses Financial Creditor's Appeal Against Rejection of Section 7 Application as Time-Barred. Application Under Section 7 of IBC, 2016 Filed Beyond Three Years from NPA Declaration Held Barred by Limitation.

Tribunals: National Company Law Appellate Tribunal Bench: CHENNAI In Favour of Accused
  • 61
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The appeal was filed by M/s. Canara Bank (Appellant/Financial Creditor) against the order of the National Company Law Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench, which dismissed its application under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) for initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) against M/s. DAAJ Hotels & Resorts Private Limited (Respondent/Corporate Debtor). The Corporate Debtor had availed financial assistance from a consortium of banks, including the Appellant, for construction of a five-star hotel. The debt was declared as Non-Performing Asset (NPA) on 31.03.2015. The Appellant filed the Section 7 application on 30.09.2019. The Adjudicating Authority dismissed the application as time-barred, holding that the application was filed beyond the three-year limitation period from the date of default (NPA declaration). The Appellant contended that the date of default was 31.03.2016 (when the account was classified as NPA by RBI guidelines) and that acknowledgments of debt by the Corporate Debtor extended limitation. The NCLAT examined the issue of limitation and held that the date of NPA declaration (31.03.2015) is the relevant date of default for computing limitation under Article 137 of the Limitation Act, 1963. The letters of acknowledgment dated 31.03.2016 and 31.03.2017 extended limitation, but the application filed on 30.09.2019 was still beyond three years from the last acknowledgment. The NCLAT dismissed the appeal, affirming the order of the Adjudicating Authority.

Headnote

A) Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code - Limitation for Section 7 Application - Date of Default - NPA Declaration - The issue was whether the application under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, filed on 30.09.2019, was within limitation when the debt was declared NPA on 31.03.2015. The NCLAT held that the date of NPA declaration is the date of default for computing limitation under Article 137 of the Limitation Act, 1963, and the application filed beyond three years from that date is time-barred. (Paras 1-13)

B) Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code - Limitation - Acknowledgment of Debt - Effect on Limitation - The Corporate Debtor's letters dated 31.03.2016 and 31.03.2017 were considered as acknowledgments of debt under Section 18 of the Limitation Act, 1963, extending limitation. However, the NCLAT found that the application was still filed beyond the extended period, as the last acknowledgment was on 31.03.2017 and the application was filed on 30.09.2019, which is beyond three years from that date. (Paras 14-20)

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the application filed by the Financial Creditor under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, was barred by limitation, given that the debt was declared as Non-Performing Asset (NPA) on 31.03.2015 and the application was filed on 30.09.2019.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The appeal is dismissed. The order of the Adjudicating Authority (NCLT Hyderabad) dismissing the Section 7 application as time-barred is upheld.

Law Points

  • Limitation period for filing Section 7 application under IBC
  • 2016 is three years from date of default
  • date of NPA declaration is relevant for computing limitation
  • Article 137 of Limitation Act
  • 1963 applies
  • application filed beyond three years from NPA declaration is time-barred
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2024 LawText (NCLAT) (01) 88

Company Appeal (AT) (CH) (Ins) No.390/2022

0000-00-00

Justice Sharad Kumar Sharma (Member Judicial)

Mr. M L Ganesh (for Appellant), Ms. Nishitha and Mr. Abhishek Jenasenan (for Respondent)

M/s. Canara Bank

M/s. DAAJ Hotels & Resorts Private Limited

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

Nature of Litigation

Appeal against dismissal of Section 7 application under IBC for initiation of CIRP

Remedy Sought

Appellant sought to set aside the order of NCLT Hyderabad dismissing its Section 7 application and to initiate CIRP against the Corporate Debtor

Filing Reason

The Corporate Debtor defaulted in repayment of loan; the debt was declared NPA on 31.03.2015; the Appellant filed Section 7 application on 30.09.2019

Previous Decisions

NCLT Hyderabad dismissed the Section 7 application as time-barred

Issues

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

Submissions/Arguments

Appellant argued that the date of default is 31.03.2016 (as per RBI guidelines) and that acknowledgments of debt extended limitation Respondent argued that the date of default is 31.03.2015 (NPA declaration) and the application is time-barred

Ratio Decidendi

For the purpose of limitation under Section 7 of IBC, the date of NPA declaration is the date of default. The limitation period of three years under Article 137 of the Limitation Act, 1963 runs from that date. Acknowledgments of debt under Section 18 of the Limitation Act can extend limitation, but the application must be filed within three years from the last acknowledgment.

Judgment Excerpts

The date of NPA declaration is the date of default for computing limitation under Article 137 of the Limitation Act, 1963. The application filed on 30.09.2019 is beyond three years from the last acknowledgment dated 31.03.2017, hence time-barred.

Procedural History

The Financial Creditor (Canara Bank) filed an application under Section 7 of IBC before NCLT Hyderabad on 30.09.2019. The NCLT dismissed the application as time-barred. The Financial Creditor appealed to NCLAT Chennai, which dismissed the appeal.

Acts & Sections

  • Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016: Section 7
  • Limitation Act, 1963: Article 137, Section 18
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Dismisses Student's Petition for Science Stream Admission Due to False Marks Declaration. Eligibility Criteria Requiring Minimum 40% Marks in 10th Standard Cannot Be Circumvented by Misrepresentation.
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Allows Landlord's Revision in Licensee Eviction Case Under Section 13A(2) of Bombay Rent Act — License Agreement Prior to Amendment Not Barred. The Court held that Section 13A(2) applies to agreements executed before its commencem...