28/02/2020

Before expiration of the period of limitation, acknowledgement of liability in writing, renews the debt but does not create a new right or action- Manesh Agarwal Vs. Bank of India – NCLAT

NCLAT held that in this case,  admittedly  the  account  of  the  Corporate  Debtor  was classified of NPA on 29th January 2013. Therefore, as per the law laid down by the Supreme Court case of Gaurav Hargovindbhai Dave, the date of default shall be computed from the date when the account was classified as NPA, i.e.29th January 2013. Given the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of B.K. Educational Services Article 137 of the Limitation Act shall be applicable for an Application filed under Sections 7, 9 or 10 of the Code. Since the account of the Corporate Debtor was classified as NPA on 29th January 2013. Therefore, default started on 29th January 2013 and three years period of limitation was available for applying u/s Section 7 of the Code.

Before expiration of the period of limitation, acknowledgement of liability in writing, renews the debt but does not create a new right or action- Manesh Agarwal Vs. Bank of India – NCLAT Read Post »

When the Applicant wants to withdraw the application before Constitution of CoC, while resorting to amended Reg. 30A, there is no bar for a party to simultaneously move AA for withdrawal relying on Rule 11 of the NCLT Rules 2016- Mr. K.C. Sanjeev vs. Mr. Easwara Pillai Kesavan Nair-NCLAT

NCLAT held that subsequent to Judgment in the matter of Swiss Ribbons, the Regulations come to be amended. Considering this, and the practical difficulties which Applicants and the Corporate Debtor like the present one are facing, we are of the view that there is no reason why Parties cannot resort simultaneously to the window given by Hon’ble Supreme Court in above Para 79. In our view when the Applicant wants to withdraw the application before Constitution of CoC, while resorting to amended Regulation 30A, there is no bar for a party to simultaneously move Adjudicating Authority for withdrawal relying on Rule 11 of the NCLT Rules 2016 in view of Right given in the Judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court. The Adjudicating Authority should receive such applications and can deal with the Applications in terms of above Para 79 while it may await response from IRP.

When the Applicant wants to withdraw the application before Constitution of CoC, while resorting to amended Reg. 30A, there is no bar for a party to simultaneously move AA for withdrawal relying on Rule 11 of the NCLT Rules 2016- Mr. K.C. Sanjeev vs. Mr. Easwara Pillai Kesavan Nair-NCLAT Read Post »

Restructuring documents, there are Minutes of Meeting of Board of Directors of the Company, which also can be taken as an acknowledgement under Section 18 of Limitation Act – Rupesh Kumar Gupta Director (Board under Suspension) M/s Kut Energy Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Punjab National Bank – NCLAT New Delh

Login with GoogleOR Username Password Remember Me     Forgot Password In case you’ve already logged in, click here

Restructuring documents, there are Minutes of Meeting of Board of Directors of the Company, which also can be taken as an acknowledgement under Section 18 of Limitation Act – Rupesh Kumar Gupta Director (Board under Suspension) M/s Kut Energy Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Punjab National Bank – NCLAT New Delh Read Post »

Scroll to Top