Sir, given that the intended was not to packed grate as fresh opportunity in the

creditor and claiments wo did do no experience their remidy no existence the

laws. Within the prescribed limitation period of deth thought did the if for their
third necessary specific subscribed applied limitation Act may be at case to cae
basis. It was futhere intened that the limation Act may not applied the applicant
of the corporative applicants has these are initiacted by the applictns or its owns
had for the perpose of CIRP I think in the forms the credite are remotes. Perusal
of the find that so that the creditor considereing that the limitations Act aplies
only to courts in this mode starting the applciation to tribunals the deater that
such should be made to applied to the IBC as well. Observing that those the IBC is
not deep regulation of laws. The degar being ain the payment of dabtor would
rather the excluded of the law the limiation counter that as application of the IBC
should not amount to reserction of the time bard deabtor which include other
forms would not have been deemed on the grount that the limitation. From the
dated of it is clear that the opportunity section 195 the limtation Act is be strictly
adhear to family that the time begen to the it can to be followed the existence by
the process no law. One the question that arise befor the court is where section
18 of the limitation act which exetended the periof of limitation defining by the
acknowledgement of our made in writting who signed by the Corporating debtot
is also applicable under section 238 A Act give expressing as far as may be
government the applicability of the limitation Acts to the IBc. The aforsaid
question is no longer the validy is the recent judgment of this court as applied to
the provisions of Section 14 of the section 18 of he limitation Act to the IBC. Those
the in Nath Singh versus IBD corporative Bank of India will the civil appeal nos 900
fo 2009 by set aside the arose that arose in the case to improved the 1893 is also
referring the to section 238A of the IBD Act . Similarlly under Section 18 of the
limitation Act and acknowldegemnt of the present substing liablility made
inwritting in respect of the right claim by the opposite party who singed by the
perod of againt see the right has claimed as effictive and commecing of the fresh
period of limitation Act to from the date of acknowldedmnet is signed. However,
the acknowledement must be made to be the period of limitation Act expire has
observed the aboved of section 238 of the ADB Act. I thinks makes the provisions
of the limiation Act as far as may be applicability to proceeding by the
development of the NCELT and IDB of its owns excluded the applicant has beebe
to 6 to 14 of 18 of anyother provision of the Limitation Act to proceeding under
IBC and Under NCLT. Apart of the provision of the limitation Act are applicabiliy to
proceeding under The NCLT that the extended the we see no reasons why section
14 to 18 of the limitation Act 1963 should ot applied to proceedings under se

ction 7 of section 9 of the IBD Act. Of course the Section 18 of the limittion Act is
not attracted in this case. Since the impugned order to it is not proceeded on the
basis of the anyother acknowledgemtn not matter for the limitation Certain of
Union Bank of India judgment early delivery to this court referring to various
judgment of this court. Including the judgment in limitation Act then held. This
supoort of such observations has been dealth with in the case of Babu lal suffice
19 observed that this matter had been ruled out the application to the section 18
of the limitation Act the proceeding under the credit the facts the situation of the
nes was reffering the considering the the purprt of section 238 of Act of the coe
has indicated. As he clarficatory in anature bring to proceedural the law had given
the retrospective included the applcation provision of the limitation Act or the
case to case basis . Indeed the support of the amenment in the court was not to
re-open or revise the time baard debtor under the limitation Act. At the same
time the approaval of fresh period of limitation in the terms of section 18 of the
limitation Act as it;s owns that Act.

PANKAJ YADAV....

20/04/2024.