AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Heard Shri Krishnendu Datta, Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Appellant, and Learned Counsel for the Respondent - Operational Creditor, and perused the records.
The instant appeal has been preferred by the Appellant, being aggrieved by the impugned order dated 17.09.2026, passed by the Learned Adjudicating Authority in C.P. (IB) No. 72/ALD/2025, whereby the CIRP has been initiated against the Appellant pursuant to an application filed under Section 9 of the Code.
Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Appellant, at the outset, submits that, even if the case of the Appellant is accepted as it is, the petition moved by the Appellant before the Learned Adjudicating Authority under Section 9 of the Code was time barred.
Elaborating further, it is submitted that the last default according to the petitioner itself had occurred on 15.09.2019 and by this date even if the suo motto petition decided by the Hon’ble Supreme Court is taken into consideration the petition should have been filed before the 31.08.2024, while the same has been filed on 04.04.2025, beyond limitation.
It is further submitted that the Learned Adjudicating Authority has relied upon a communication allegedly sent by the Petitioner/Respondent dated 07.12.2021 and has taken the same as an acknowledgment, in utter disregard of the provisions contained in Section 18 of the Indian Limitation Act, 1963, as for extending the limitation on the basis of an acknowledgment in writing, any communication of the other party could only be taken into the cognizance.
It is further submitted that the order passed by the Learned Adjudicating Authority is not sustainable in law and, therefore the same be set aside and or may be remanded back to the Learned Adjudicating Authority for decision a fresh.
Learned Counsel for the Respondent/Operational Creditor submits that the plea of limitation was not taken by the Appellant before the Learned Adjudicating Authority and had it been taken, a suitable reply would have been filed by the Operational Creditor.
He further submits that he is not having any objection so far as the remand of the case to Learned Adjudicating Authority is concerned, however, the remand should only be confined on the issue of limitation and the further process which may be undertaken before the Learned Adjudicating Authority should be made time bound, so that the further delay in decision of the Learned Adjudicating Authority may not be caused unnecessarily by the Appellant.
We have considered the rival submissions made by Learned Counsel for the Parties and have perused the record. We notice that the Learned Adjudicating Authority, in paragraph No. 46 of the impugned judgment, has relied on an e-mail sent by the Respondent (Petitioner before the Learned Adjudicating Authority) for extending limitation under Section 18 of the Indian Limitation Act, 1963. The basic objection of Learned Counsel for the Appellant is that the same could not have been taken into cognizance for the purpose of extending the period of limitation under Section 18 of the Indian Limitation Act, 1963, as the party who has himself written some communication may not use it for the purpose of Section 18.
We prima facie agree that the submissions made by Learned Counsel for the Appellant.
We also notice that no objection has been raised by Learned Counsel for the Operational Creditor with regard to the remand of the matter to Learned Adjudicating Authority except that the process before the Learned Adjudicating Authority be made time-bound. We also notice that the Learned Adjudicating Authority has also not taken into consideration the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in suo motto petition 03 of 2020 passed on various dates.
In view of the above, for the reasons contained hereinbefore, the impugned order dated 17.09.2026, passed by the Learned Adjudicating Authority is set aside and the matter is remanded back to the Learned Adjudicating Authority for decision a fresh on the question of limitation, only.
For this purpose, we revive the C.P. (IB) No. 72/ALD/2025 on the board of the Learned Adjudicating Authority.
We further request the Learned Adjudicating Authority to make all efforts to dispose of the petition afresh, after providing an opportunity of being heard to the parties, including tendering of fresh documentary evidence, within 30 days from receipt of a certified copy of this order.
With the aforesaid directions, the appeal is finally disposed of.
There is no order as to costs. Pending I.A.’s if any, is also disposed of.
The parties shall appear before the Learned Adjudicating Authority on 12.10.2026.