Indian Bank vs Gaurav P Hinduja
- CitationCompany Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 734 of 2024
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The Supreme Court's extension-of-limitation directions in the Suo Moto Writ Petition (Civil) No. 3 of 2020, which exclude the period from 15.03.2020 to 28.02.2022 from limitation for judicial and quasi-judicial proceedings, apply to an application under Section 95(1) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, so that when the excluded period is taken out of account, an application filed after the Adjudicating Authority's computed deadline is within time and cannot be rejected on limitation grounds.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
IN THE MATTER OF: Indian Bank. ...Appellant Versus Gaurav P Hinduja ...Respondent
Present: For Appellant : Mr. Ashish Rana, Advocate. For Respondent : Mr. Karan Suneja, Advocate for R-1.
ORDER
(Hybrid Mode)
08.11.2024: In this appeal notices were issued on 01.05.2024. Order
passed in the appeal on 01.05.2024 is as follows:
"ORDER (Hybrid Mode)
01.05.2024: I.A. No. 2617 of 2024
1. This is an application praying for condonation of 14 days delay in filing the Appeal.
2. Learned Counsel for the Appellant submits that after the order was passed, time was taken in obtaining approval from the Bank Authorities and thereafter Appeal was prepared.
Cause shown sufficient. Delay is condoned.
Comp. App. (AT) (Ins.) No. 734 of 2024
1. Learned Counsel for the Appellant submits that Section 95 application filed by the Appellant has been rejected on the ground that it is barred by time.
Cont'd.../ 2
2. Counsel for the Appellant submits that the Adjudicating Authority has not extended the benefit of Judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Suo Moto Writ Petition (Civil) No. 3 of 2020 in the matter of 'Re: Cognizance for Extension of Limitation' and in view of the aforesaid Judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the application was within time.
3. Issue Notice.
4. Let Reply be filed within three weeks. Rejoinder be filed within further two weeks.
List this Appeal on 19th July, 2024."
2. Notices were returned back then by order dated 18.09.2024, the
Appellant was permitted to effect service on the Respondent by publication in
two newspapers. An affidavit of service has been filed by the Appellant
bringing on record the paper publication dated 18.10.2024. Notices have
been published in the newspapers but no one has appeared for the
Respondents. We hold the service sufficient and proceed to hear the Appellant
on merits.
3. Learned counsel for the Appellant submits that the Adjudicating
Authority has rejected the application filed under Section 95(1) by the Indian
Bank as barred by time. It is submitted that the Adjudicating Authority in
the impugned order has treated the date of recovery certificate issued by DRT
i.e. 13.11.2019 as date of commencement of limitation and it was held that
application filed on 17.01.2024 is barred by time.
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No.734 of 2024 3
4. Learned counsel for the Appellant submits that the limitation for filing
the application shall not expire on 17.01.2024 as opined by the Adjudicating
Authority in view of the order passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Suo
Moto Writ Petition (Civil) No.3 of 2020. Learned counsel for the Appellant has
referred to order dated 10.01.2022 passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court,
Para 5(I), which is as follows:
"I. The order dated 23.03.2020 is restored and in continuation of the subsequent orders dated 08.03.2021, 27.04.2021 and 23.09.2021, it is directed that the period from 15.03.2020 till 28.02.2022 shall stand excluded for the purposes of limitation as may be prescribed under any general or special laws in respect of all judicial or quasi-judicial proceedings."
5. The order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court clearly directed that period
from 15.03.2020 till 28.02.2022 shall stand excluded for the purposes of
limitation. When we exclude the aforesaid period, the limitation for filing
application does not expire on 17.01.2024 as opined by the Adjudicating
Authority and the limitation period shall be there till 29.10.2024, as
submitted by learned counsel for the Appellant. We, thus are of the view that
the Application filed by the Indian Bank ought not to have been rejected on
the ground of limitation.
6. We, thus, set aside order dated 13.02.2024 and revive application filed
under Section 95 by Indian Bank before the NCLT, Ahmedabad to be heard
and decided in accordance with law.
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No.734 of 2024 4
7. The Personal Guarantor having not appeared, the Adjudicating
Authority may issue fresh notice to the Personal Guarantor before proceeding
further. Appeal is disposed of.
[Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson
[Arun Baroka] Member (Technical) Archana/nn
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No.734 of 2024
This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.
Research this judgment with Miss Lucy
Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.
Try Miss Lucy free