TMI Blog2019 (12) TMI 187X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the provision of Article 137 of Limitation Act, this Adjudicating Authority is of the considered view, that the present claim of the applicant/petitioner is barred by Article 137 of Limitation Act - the present petition filed u/s 9 is barred by limitation, thus this petition is not liable to be admitted - the prayer to initiate proceedings under Section 9, read with Sections 13, 14 33 and other applicable provisions of the Insolvency Bankruptcy Code, 2016, against the Corporate Debtor company by the applicant, is hereby rejected - petition dismissed. - CP NO. (IB) 168 (ALD.) OF 2019 - - - Dated:- 4-10-2019 - A.R.K. Sinha, Judicial Member Chetan Chatterjee, Adv. for the Petitioner. ORDER 1. The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pecial Allowances was ₹ 1,21,250/- (Rupees One Lakh Twenty One Thousand Two Hundred and Fifty only) and petitioner was handedover transfer letter for joining from the current place of work as the office of the respondent at Calkutta to Lucknow on 01.06.2015, vide transfer order No. HO/HR/27646, dated 29.05.2015. d. The last payment of full monthly salary of petitioner (₹ 1,21,250/-) was disbursed to the petitioner on 25.10.2014. Thereafter, after the month of September, 2014, wherein the petitioner was paid an amount of ₹ 1,30,541/- the petitioner was paid an amount of ₹ 1,02,678/- on 20.10.2014, followed by an amount of ₹ 29,774/- on 01.11.2014, only. The payment received by the petitioner from the re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... = 3,67,500/- but the respondent had not paid the aforesaid amount till date. g. After that petitioner had resigned from the respondent company and the same was accepted on 08.09.2015. The acceptance letter dated 08.09.2015, is also annexed with the petition as Annexure P-6. h. The petitioner thereafter has served a demand notice before filing of this petition under Clause A of Sub Rule 1 of Rule 5 of Insolvency and Bankruptcy (Application to Adjudicating Authority) Rules, 2016, by means of registered post on 01.01.2018, which is annexed with the present petition as Annexure P-7. i. The total amount claimed by the petitioner is ₹ 12,49,250/- and the first date on which the default occurred is 30.09.2015, whi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to sue , therefore, accrues when a default occurs. If the default has occurred over three years prior to the date of filing of the application, the application would be barred under Article 137 of the Limitation Act, save and except in those cases where, in the facts of the case, Section 5 of the Limitation Act maybe applied to condone the delay in filing such application. 8. At this juncture I would also like to refer another decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Gaurav Hargovindbhai Dave v. Asset Reconstruction Co. (India) Ltd. [2019] 109 taxmann.com 395 in para 6, held that :- ...... what is apparent is that Article 62 is out of the way on the ground that it would only apply to suits. The present cas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
