The Adjudicating Authority was duty bound under Section 3 of the Limitation Act, 1963 to suo motu consider if or not the Application under Section 7 of IBC was within Limitation by considering if or not the debt said to be in default was within Limitation – A. Balakrishnan Vs. Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited – NCLAT New Delhi
Earlier in the matter of Digamber Bhondwe Vs. JM Financial Asset Reconstruction [2020] ibclaw.in 178 NCLAT also the Learned Counsel therein had claimed that the date of NPA was to be ignored and Limitation was to be counted from the date of Recovery Certificate for Section 7 of IBC. NCLAT held that time gone into details and for reasons recorded concluded that we are unable to accept the submissions that date of NPA was to be ignored and Limitation was to be counted from the date of Recovery Certificate. Even now, for reasons recorded by us in the Judgment of Digamber Bhondwe Vs. JM Financial Asset Reconstruction, when we have revisited the Judgment in the matter of Vashdeo R Bhojwani Vs. Abhyudaya Co-operative Bank Ltd. & Anr. we are unable to agree that the Judgment gives a fresh date to trigger Application under Section 7 of IBC.
