State Bank Of India vs Sical Logistics Ltd
- CitationCompany Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 16 of 2020
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The Adjudicating Authority is competent to decide, of its own motion, whether an application under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 is barred by limitation under Section 238A of the Code read with Article 137 of the Limitation Act, 1963, even where the corporate debtor has not raised limitation as a plea.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
State Bank of India ...Appellant
Vs.
Sical Logistics Ltd. ...Respondent
Present: For Appellant: - Mr. Sindhu T.P. and Mr. Ashwini Kumar Singh, Advocates.
For Respondent: - None.
O R D E R
08.01.2020─ The Appellant- 'State Bank of India' claimed to be an
'Operational Creditor' and moved an application under Section 9 of the
Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 against 'M/s. Sical Logistics
Ltd.'- ('Corporate Debtor'). The Adjudicating Authority (National Company
Law Tribunal), Division Bench-I, Chennai, by impugned order dated 19th
November, 2019, taking into consideration the fact that the date of
default was 10th April, 2008, rejected the application under Section 9
being barred by limitation.
2. Reliance has been placed on Section 238 A of the 'I&B Code' read
with Article 137 of the Schedule under the Limitation Act, 1963.
Contd/-..........
-2-
3. Learned counsel for the Appellant submitted that such plea has
not been taken up by the Respondent. However, such submission cannot
be accepted as it is within the domain of the Adjudicating Authority
(Court of Competent Jurisdiction) to decide whether the application is
barred by limitation or not.
4. In view of the aforesaid position, while we condone the delay of 7
days in preferring the appeal, dismiss the appeal as without being any
merit.
The appeal is accordingly dismissed. No costs.
(Justice S.J. Mukhopadhaya) Chairperson
(Justice Bansi Lal Bhat) Member(Judicial)
Ar/g
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 16 of 2020
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