20.4.

2024
Sir, given that intend was not to packages the got as fresh opportunity for creditor and claimant
who did not exercise there remedy under existing laws. Even the prescribe limitation act period
the committee thought had fit to in short specific section applying the limitation act to the court
the relevant entry under the limitation may be at case to case basis. It was further noted that the
limitation made not apply the application of charter applicant as these are initiated by the
applicant for it is own debates for the purpose of IRR an I not in the frame not way creditor
remedy an perusal of the above would show that considering that the limitation act applies only
to courts unless made start worth applicable to tribunal the committee was of the future that such
at should be made to apply to the IPC as well observing that though, the IPC is not an debate
recovery law. The trigger being before in payment of debate would lender the exclusion of the
law limitation counter in debate. Thus, it was made clear that an application to the IPC should
not amount to resurrection of time BARD debate which in any other forum would have been
dismissed on the ground of limitation.
From the above it is clear that the numbers of section 9 of the limitation act. Is to be
strictly adhere to namely that when time beginning to rain it can not be fault except by an precise
non to law one question that arise before this court is whether section 18 of the limitation act our
extent the period of limitation defending upon and acknowledgement of debate made in writing
and signed by the corporation date. Is also applicable under section 238A given the expression as
far as may be governing the applicability of the limitation act to the IPC the aforesaid question is
no longer valid as to recent judgement of this court have apply the provision of section 14 and
section 18 of the limitation act to the IPC thus, in shah nath said verses B.D corporation bank
limited, civil appeal number 9000 or 2019 that arose in that case in paragraph 57and after
referring to section 238A of IPC.
Similar, under section 18, of the limitation act and acknowledgement of present
subsisting liability made in writing in respect of any right claimed by the opposite part and
assigned by the party against him the right is claimed as the effect of commencing of fresh period
of limitation from the date of which the acknowledgement must be made before the period of
limitation expires as observing above section 238 A of the IPC makes the provision of the
limitation act. As far as may be applicable to proceeding before the NCLT and the NCLAT the
IPC does not exclude the application of section this or 14 or 18 or any other provision of the
limitation act, to proceeding under the IPC in the NCLT. All the provision of the limitation act,
are applicable to proceeding in the NCLT to the extent feasible we are see under reasons why
section 14 and 18 of the limitation act 1963 should not apply to proceeding under section 7 or
section 9 of the IPC of course section 18 of the limitation act is not attracted in that case since the
impugned order of the NCLAT does not proceeded on the basis of any acknowledgement.
Nearer home in Laxmi Path Singh verses Union Bank Of India the Judgement early trade
this court after porting to suffice judgement of this court including the judgement in Baba Lal
then held the support of such observation has been dealt with in the case of Baba Lal suffice it to
observe that this court and not rule out. The application of section 18 of the limitation act to the
proceeding under the got if the fact situation of the case so wrong considering that the pur-port
of section 238 A of the bill is enacted his in nature and being an procedural law at the given
retrospective packages which include application of the provision of the limitation act on case to
case basis indeed the support of amendment in the court was not to reopen or revive the time
bard debts under the Limitation Act at the same time approval on fresh period of limitation in
terms of section 18 of the Limitation act is on its own that act...
Shivanshu dwivedi 2539