9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (3) TMI 1266X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he ledger account of the Corporate Debtor at page 77 and it comes within the acknowledgment under Section 18 of the Limitation Act. There is no dispute that the Article 137 of the Limitation Act is applicable in case of IBC, and therefore, that decisions will not help the applicant rather it Corroborate our contentions that the Limitation runs from the date when the right to apply accrues that is either from the first date of debt become due or the date when it was acknowledged. Since the acknowledgement was made on 14.03.2016 and the present application has been filed on 15.01.2020 therefore, the present application is barred by the limitation. The present application is dismissed as barred by limitation. - IB-551/ND/2020 - - - Da ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Singh and Others 2020 right to sue accrues arise when there is infringement of rise and in the case the right of sue accrues when the respondent refused to pay the amount. Now in the light of submissions raised on behalf of the applicant, we have gone through the averments as well as the documents filed on behalf of the applicant, and the decisions on which the applicant has placed reliance and from the careful consideration of the same, we find that the invoices are dated 06.07.2015 and at Page 22 part 4 column 2 of the applications, the applicant mentioned that the date of default is 08.08.2015 pursuant to the issuance of invoice No. 255 and thereafter on 04.02.2017 when the Corporate Debtor for the first time disputed its liability to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... limitation from the date of 14.03.2016, then the applicant must filed the application within three years from 14.03.2016 i.e. on or before 13.03.2019 but the present application is filed on 15.01.2020, that is much after the period of three years from the date of acknowledgement. At this juncture, we would like to refer submissions made on behalf of the Ld. Counsel appearing for the applicant. In course of arguments he has placed reliance upon the decision reported in AIR 2012 SC 3240 in a case to Daya Singh and other Vs. Gurudev Singh and others. We have gone through the decision and we find that the facts of the above-said case are different from the facts of the case in hand. Therefore in our considered view that decision will not he ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
