9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (5) TMI 982X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n 4 of the IT Act is to allow any information which can be transmitted on paper by physical mode to also be henceforth transmitted in electronic form too. In other words, this section recognizes that a document sent and received electronically shall be deemed to have complied with the requirement of sending information in writing - the Adjudicating Authority is agreed upon that merely because a document is sent via electronic mode instead of physical mode, the legal and mandatory requirements of authentication of documents will not change and cannot be dispensed away. Section 18 of the Limitation Act also specifies that the acknowledgment should be in writing and signed by the party against whom such right is claimed though of course the word sign or signed has not been defined in the said section. This requirement is required to be met irrespective of whether it is in electronic or in physical form. Merely because a document is sent via e-mail, the mandatory requirements of Section 18 cannot be exempted - the Adjudicating Authority only exercises summary jurisdiction in admitting or rejecting the Application under Section 9 of the Code. In view of their limited jurisdiction ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Operational Creditor used to supply footwear and related products to the Corporate Debtor/Respondent on the basis of purchase orders received from them. It was also submitted that the invoices stipulated payment to be made 75 days from the date of invoice. Goods were supplied between April June 2016 and payment fell due on 08.07.2016. The date of default on the part of the Corporate Debtor as submitted by the Appellant is 08.07.2016. The Operational Creditor issued a demand notice to the Corporate Debtor on 02.07.2019 demanding payment of Rs.22.26 lakhs as unpaid operational debt including interest @ 18% per annum. However, the Corporate Debtor did not issue any notice of dispute. The Operational Creditor thereafter filed a Section 9 application before the Adjudicating Authority. 3. The Learned Counsel for the Appellant contended that the Section 9 application was erroneously dismissed by the Adjudicating Authority on grounds of having been barred by limitation. It was submitted that the impugned order took note of date of default to be 08.07.2016 as mentioned in Part IV of the Demand Notice and held that the Section 9 application having been filed on 22.01.2020 which was we ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... zed person on behalf of the Corporate Debtor. More importantly, the statement of account attached to the email acknowledging the debt was unsigned and did not carry the stamp and seal of the Corporate Debtor. Hence, in the absence of any date and proper authentication thereof, the authenticity of the external file attachment containing an aged account statement of the Corporate Debtor cannot be ascertained beyond doubt. It was, therefore, argued that the Adjudicating Authority had rightly held that the Company Petition filed before it was barred by limitation. 7. We have duly considered the arguments and submissions advanced by the Learned Counsel for the parties and perused the records carefully. 8. We notice that the Corporate Debtor in their reply dated 09.03.2020 to the Section 9 application filed by the Appellant had raised several objections, inter-alia, non-maintainability arising out of the bar created by the Indian Partnership Act, 1932; invalidity of demand notice being in Form III and for not containing date of default; non-receipt of demand notice and non-service with the Information Utility; defective issue of demand notice; etc. We also notice that the Adjudicat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... device including attachments in text, image, audio, video and any other electronic record, which may be transmitted with the message. Hence, the attachment being part of the main body of email, it enjoyed the sanctity of being an electronic mail. 11. It is also submitted that with digital and new communication systems having become all pervasive, there is rampant use of computers to create, transmit, receive and store information in the electronic form substituting the use of traditional paper documents. It was further submitted that the preamble of the IT Act, 2000 also reinforces the adoption of electronic means of communication. Digital technology facilitates scope for creation, compression, storage, preservation of data and their easy transmission. That being so, if any party acknowledges by way of email that certain amounts are due then it amounts to an acknowledgement of debt. It was also pointed out that Section 18 of the Limitation Act does not provide that the acknowledgment has to be in any particular format and hence the email of 05.05.2017 and the file attachment which had been transmitted electronically must be construed as meeting the requirement of Section 18 of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... neither signed by any authorized person nor bears the Company Seal. Further, we notice that the Applicant, for the acknowledgement of debt, has referred to and relied on the attachment containing Accounts statement of the Corporate Debtor, which as we have observed, is not duly authenticated. 35. We understand that there is no requirement or scope to sign the main body of the e-mail and at the same time, there is no possibility of tampering the date and time of the main body of e-mail, which is a major factor while considering the issue of limitation. Per contra, if acknowledgement of debt is made basing on the contents of an attachment, which is an external file exported/attached with the mail and if that attachment is not duly authenticated by signature of the authorized person and date or/and Company Seal, it is not possible to ascertain beyond doubt to which date the document is generated or belongs to. 36. Further, sending a communication by way of an attachment with an email can be understood like sending a communication by a virtual speed envelope. At the end, what matters is what is there inside the virtual envelop/ attachment. Just like an unsigned document sent ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... above provision makes it clear that the intent of Section 4 of the IT Act is to allow any information which can be transmitted on paper by physical mode to also be henceforth transmitted in electronic form too. In other words, this section recognizes that a document sent and received electronically shall be deemed to have complied with the requirement of sending information in writing. Put differently, documents which were hitherto, transmitted by handwriting or in typewritten/printed form can now be transmitted in electronic form. Be that as it may, Section 4 of the IT Act, 2000 does not expressly or implicitly make any special dispensation for electronic messages. It follows therefrom that the prescribed format or procedural niceties which the paper-based communication is required to follow is ipso facto equally applicable to the electronic messages. We, therefore, agree with the Adjudicating Authority that merely because a document is sent via electronic mode instead of physical mode, the legal and mandatory requirements of authentication of documents will not change and cannot be dispensed away. 18. We also notice that the contents of the email of 05.05.2017 and the statemen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
