AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Case Number
Disposition
Advocates
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Case Number
Disposition
Advocates
Judges
Smart Summary

Factual and Procedural Background

This appeal arises from an order dated 18th February, 2022 passed by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal, Mumbai Bench) in Company Petition No. 1258/MB/I&B/2020. The petition was filed under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 by Respondent No. 1 (Financial Creditor), and the Adjudicating Authority admitted the application within time. The Appellant challenged this admission on the ground that the application was barred by limitation, contending that the 'Date of Default' was 25th August, 2017, whereas the application was filed on 28th August, 2020, thus exceeding the three-year limitation period.

Legal Issues Presented

  1. Whether the application under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 was barred by limitation based on the 'Date of Default' mentioned in the petition.
  2. Whether the last payment made by the Corporate Debtor on 31st July, 2018 affects the limitation period for filing the application.
  3. The relevance and application of the Supreme Court judgment in Babulal Vardharji Gurjar Vs. Veer Gurjar Aluminium Industries Pvt. Ltd. & Anr regarding the ascertainment of the date of default.

Arguments of the Parties

Appellant's Arguments

  • The 'Date of Default' stated in Part-IV of the Section 7 Application was 25th August, 2017.
  • The application filed on 28th August, 2020 was therefore beyond the three-year limitation period and barred by time.
  • The Adjudicating Authority erred in admitting the application without considering the limitation bar.
  • Reliance was placed on the Supreme Court judgment in Babulal Vardharji Gurjar Vs. Veer Gurjar Aluminium Industries Pvt. Ltd. & Anr, which holds that the date of default must be ascertained from the pleadings in the Section 7 application.

Respondents' Arguments

  • This information was not available in the provided opinion.

Table of Precedents Cited

Precedent Rule or Principle Cited For Application by the Court
Babulal Vardharji Gurjar Vs. Veer Gurjar Aluminium Industries Pvt. Ltd. & Anr (2020 (15) SCC 1) Ascertainment of the date of default based on pleadings in the Section 7 application under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code. The Court noted the judgment but held that the last payment made on 31.07.2018, as evidenced in the documents accompanying the application, extended the limitation period, thereby rendering the application within time. Consequently, the judgment did not aid the Appellant's contention.

Court's Reasoning and Analysis

The Court examined the facts and the record, particularly the statement of account filed by the Petitioner through the information utility (NESL), which showed the last repayment of Rs. 2 Lakhs was made by the Corporate Debtor on 31st July, 2018. Since the application was filed on 28th August, 2020, it was within three years from the date of last payment, and thus not barred by limitation.

The Court rejected the Appellant's argument relying solely on the 'Date of Default' mentioned in the application as 25th August, 2017, emphasizing that the relevant date for limitation is the last payment date, which extended the limitation period.

The Court also considered the Supreme Court judgment cited by the Appellant but concluded that it did not support the Appellant's case because the documents accompanying the application showed a later date of default (last payment), which was accepted by the Adjudicating Authority.

Accordingly, the Court upheld the admission of the application under Section 7 of the IBC as valid and within time.

Holding and Implications

The appeal is dismissed.

The direct effect of this decision is the confirmation of the Adjudicating Authority's order admitting the insolvency application filed by Respondent No. 1 as within the prescribed limitation period. No new precedent was established beyond affirming that the last payment date, supported by documentary evidence, governs the limitation period under Section 7 of the IBC rather than the initially stated 'Date of Default' alone.

To access the original judgment, please Sign In or Subscribe.

    Atharva Auto Logistics Pvt Ltd v. Intec Capital Limited & Anr.

    1

    Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 303 of 2022

    NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL

    PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI

    Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 303 of 2022

    IN THE MATTER OF:

    Atharva Auto Logistics Pvt. Ltd. …Appellant Versus

    Intec Capital Ltd. & Anr. …Respondents Present:

    For Appellant: Mr. Sangramsingh Bhonsle, Ms. Samridhi Jain, Nrupal Dingankar and Mr. Satyam Tripathi, Advocates.

    For Respondent: Mr. Amir Arsiwala, Mr. Piyush Deshpande, Mr. Aabhas Singh, Advocates for R-1.

    Mr. Akshay Petkar, Mr. Ayush Negi, Advocates for R-2.

    O R D E R

    (Virtual Mode) 24.03.2022: Heard Learned Counsel for the Appellant. Learned Counsel for the Respondent No. 1 and Respondent No. 2 are also present.

    2. This Appeal has been filed against the Order dated 18thFebruary, 2022 passed by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal, Court- 5, Mumbai Bench) in CP No. 1258/MB/I&B/2020. By which Order, Application being CP No. 1258/MB/I&B/2020 filed under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC in short) by the Respondent No. 1 has been admitted as well within time.

    3. Learned Counsel for the Appellant submitted that in Part-IV of the Section

    7 Application, the 'Date of Default' was mentioned as 25thAugust, 2017 and from

    2

    25thAugust, 2017, the Application was barred by time since it was filed on 28th August, 2020. He further submitted that Adjudicating Authority even after noticing the aforesaid fact has not adverted to and held that Application is not barred by time.

    4. We have considered the submissions of Learned Counsel for the Parties and perused the record.

    5. The Adjudicating Authority in Paragraph 6 of the Order has made following observations:

    "6. The Petitioner has also filed record of default by the information utility (NESL). The statement of account produced by the Petitioner shows that the last repayment of Rs. 2 Lakhs was made by the Corporate Debtor on 31.07.2018."

    6. When the last payment was made on 31stJuly, 2018, the Application filed on 28thAugust, 2020 was well within three years from the last payment. The submission of the Appellant that Application was barred by time cannot be accepted. The payment details regarding the payment was already the part of the Application which has been brought on record along with the Application and from such details regarding the payment when the Adjudicating Authority has noticed the submissions that last payment was made on 31stJuly, 2018, the Application cannot be said to be barred by time. The default and debt were proved, on that basis the Application was admitted. We do not agree with the submissions of the Learned Counsel for the Appellant that Application was barred by time.

    3

    7. Learned Counsel for the Appellant has placed reliance on a Judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in 2020 (15) SCC 1 in the matter of 'Babulal Vardharji Gurjar Vs. Veer Gurjar Aluminium Industries Pvt. Ltd. & Anr.' and submitted that Hon'ble Apex Court has held that the date of default has to be ascertained on the basis of pleadings in Section 7 Application of the IBC. In the present case, Part-IV of the Section 7 Application of the IBC, 'Date of Default' is dated 25thAugust, 2017 there is no dispute regarding that but along with the Application the relevant documents including ledger account of the payment were also brought on record where the last payment made by the Corporate Debtor has been mentioned on 31.07.2018 and the same has been noticed by the Adjudicating Authority. In view of the last payment made on 31.07.2018 as noted above, the Application was well within time and the Financial Creditor entitled for taking benefit of 3 years period of limitation from the date of last payment. The Judgment relied on by the Learned Counsel for the Appellant does not come to any aid to the Appellant in the present case. In view of the aforesaid, we do not find any merit in the Appeal, the Appeal is dismissed.

    [Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson

    [Dr. Alok Srivastava] Member (Technical) [Ms. Shreesha Merla] Member (Technical)

    Basant/nn

    Use AI to get other relevant cases.

    Comments

    Atharva Auto Logistics Pvt Ltd v. Intec Capital Limited & Anr.
    (Mar 24, 2022)