9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (9) TMI 18X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cted by the Appellant because no evidence is brought on record to show that there has ever been any effort by the Appellant either by filing any suit or any proceedings in respect of quality of the goods. It is further submitted that the Appellant, in the written submissions filed before the Adjudicating Authority has made bald averments of making request several time to the Respondent to take back the material which has not been accepted by the IOCL, without giving any particular date of the said instance. Therefore, the objection raised by the Appellant about the pre-existing dispute is just for the sake of an objection otherwise it has no legs to stand. Appeal dismissed. - Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 158 of 2017 - - - Dated:- 30-8-2022 - [Justice Rakesh Kumar Jain] Member (Judicial) , [Dr. Alok Srivastava] Member (Technical) And [Mr. Naresh Salecha] Member (Technical) For the Appellant : Mr. Arvind Kr. Gupta, Mr. Henna George, Advocates For the Respondents : Mr. Amir Arsiwala, Mr. Dhaval Deshpande, Nupur Shah, Advocates JUDGMENT Per : Justice Rakesh Kumar Jain. This appeal is preferred by the Corporate Debtor against the order dated 31.07 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd the case was remanded back to this Appellate Tribunal for a fresh disposal in accordance with law. 7. After the remand, the present appeal was disposed of by order dated 09.07.2018, upholding the order of the Adjudicating Authority. The Corporate Debtor challenged the order dated 09.07.2018 before the Hon ble Supreme Court by way of Civil Appeal No. 7281 of 2018 on the ground that no notice was given to them and hence, they remained unrepresented before the Appellate Tribunal. The said appeal was allowed, order dated 09.07.2018 was set aside and the case was again remanded back to this Appellate Tribunal for fresh hearing. 8. Counsel for the Appellant has raised two issues, namely, the application filed under Section 9 of the Code is barred by limitation because the operational debt is pertaining to the year 2011-12 whereas the application under Section 9 of the Code was filed in the year 2017 and that there is a pre-existing dispute. 9. Counsel for the Appellant, while assailing the finding of the Adjudicating Authority on the issue of limitation has submitted that it is now well settled by a catena of Judgments, both by the Hon ble Supreme Court and this Appellate Tri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ication either under Section 7 or 9 of the Code is three years in view of Article 137 of the Limitation Act, 1961 which has to be seen from the date of default. 14. There is no dispute that the Appellant was referred to as a Sick unit by BIFR on 09.11.2005 and the embargo of Section 22 of the SICA was lifted with the repeal of SICA w.e.f. 01.12.2016. In this regard, it would be relevant to refer to Section 22 of the SICA which read as under:- 22. Suspension of legal proceedings, contracts, etc.-(1) Where in respect of an industrial company, an inquiry under section 16 is pending or any scheme referred to under section 17 is under preparation or consideration or a sanctioned scheme is under implementation or where an appeal under section 25 relating to an industrial company is pending, then, notwithstanding anything contained in the Companies Act, 1956 (1 of 1956) or any other law or the memorandum and articles of association of the industrial company or any other instrument having effect under the said Act or other law, no proceedings for the winding up of the industrial company or for execution, distress or the like against any of the properties of the industrial company or ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... w, the memorandum and articles of association of the company or any instrument having effect under the said Act or other law or any agreement or any decree or order of a court, tribunal, officer or other authority or of any submission, settlement or standing order and accordingly,- (a) any remedy for the enforcement of any right, privilege, obligation and liability suspended or modified by such declaration, and all proceedings relating thereto pending before any court, tribunal, officer or other authority shall remain stayed or be continued subject to such declaration; and (b) on the declaration ceasing to have effect- (i) any right, privilege, obligation or liability so remaining suspended or modified, shall become revived and enforceable as if the declaration had never been made; and (ii) any proceeding so remaining stayed shall be proceeded with, subject to the provisions of any law which may then be in force, from the stage which had been reached when the proceedings became stayed. (5) In computing the period of limitation for the enforcement of any right, privilege, obligation or liability, the period during which it or the remedy for the enforcem ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
