An attachment containing accounts statement annexed with an e-mail without any signature and date or/and Company Seal cannot be held authenticated or valid in terms of Section 18 of Limitation Act for extending the period of Limitation – M/s. G. L. Shoes Vs. M/s. Action Udhyog Pvt. Ltd. – NCLT New Delhi Bench Court-II

In this case, the Adjudicating Authority held that (i) Application u/s 9 of IBC filed by the Unregistered Partnership firm is maintainable. (ii) From the provision under Section 215(3), it can be inferred that it is optional for the Operational Creditor to serve the demand notice with the Information Utility. Since the service of demand notice with the Information Utility will not cause any prejudice to the Corporate Debtor in any manner. (iii) If acknowledgement of debt is made basing on the contents of an attachment, which is an external file exported/attached with the mail and if that attachment is not duly authenticated by signature of the authorized person and date or/and Company Seal, it is not possible to ascertain beyond doubt to which date the document is generated or belongs to.

An attachment containing accounts statement annexed with an e-mail without any signature and date or/and Company Seal cannot be held authenticated or valid in terms of Section 18 of Limitation Act for extending the period of Limitation – M/s. G. L. Shoes Vs. M/s. Action Udhyog Pvt. Ltd. – NCLT New Delhi Bench Court-II Read Post »