# JONES LANG LASALLE PROPERTY CONSULTANTS (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED vs. M. A. LEASING AND CONSRUCTION PVT. LTD. AND ORS.

> HC judgment dated 2026-05-06. Citation: TCN-2026-HC-00021. JONES LANG LASALLE PROPERTY CONSULTANTS (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED (Plaintiff) claimed unpaid fees for…

- **Court:** HC
- **Order date:** 6 May 2026
- **Citation:** TCN-2026-HC-00021
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/bombay-high-court-panaji/jones-lang-lasalle-property-consultants-india-private-limited-vs-m-a-leasing-and-gjflq

## Summary

### Background

JONES LANG LASALLE PROPERTY CONSULTANTS (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED (Plaintiff) claimed unpaid fees for services rendered to M. A. LEASING AND CONSRUCTION PVT. LTD. (Defendant No. 1) and its directors (Defendant Nos. 2-4). The Plaintiff issued a demand notice under Section 8 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) to Defendant No. 1, which was replied to. Subsequently, the Plaintiff initiated a proceeding under Section 9 of IBC before the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT). On September 10, 2023, the NCLT dismissed the Section 9 application, finding a pre-existing dispute between the parties. Following this dismissal, the Plaintiff filed the instant civil suit, seeking the benefit of Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963, to exclude the time spent in the NCLT

…

## Facts

Plaintiff rendered certain services to the defendants and claims unpaid price/fees from them.

Defendant no. 1 allegedly received and accepted the services provided by the plaintiff.

Defendant nos. 2 to 4 are the directors of defendant no. 1.

On November 29, 2019, the plaintiff issued a notice under Section 8 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) to defendant no. 1 for unpaid price/fees.

By a letter dated December 12, 2019, defendant no. 1 replied to the demand notice.

On July 29, 2020, the plaintiff instituted a proceeding under Section 9 of IBC before the Jurisdictional National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT).

On September 10, 2023, the NCLT dismissed the Section 9 application, holding that there was a pre-existing dispute between the parties.

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the provisions laid down under Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963 shall apply in the …

**Ratio:** Section 14(1) of the Limitation Act, 1963, which allows for the exclusion of time spent

…

**Reasoning:** The Court liberally interpreted Section 14 of the Limitation Act to advance justice. The

…

**Interpretation:** The phrase 'defect of jurisdiction or other cause of a like nature' in Section

…

**Application:** In the present case, the plaintiff diligently pursued its claim first through a

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** Aniruddha R…
- **Appellants:** JONES LANG…
- **Respondents:** M. A. LEASING AND…; Defendant nos. 2…
- **Other parties:** Kalabu…
- **Advocates:** Sourojit Da…; Subhradi…; +1 more

## Timeline

- **2019-10-29 — Cause of Acti…**: The date when the cause of action…
- **2019-11-29 — IBC Demand Noti…**: Plaintiff issued a notice under Section 8 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, to…

## Legal provisions

- [Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Section 8 — Insolvency resolution by operational creditor](https://caseease.in/legal-provisions/insolvency-and-bankruptcy-code-2016/section-8)

---

This is a preview. The full structured summary, issues, precedents and source judgment are available on CaseEase - Legal Intelligence Simplified: https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/bombay-high-court-panaji/jones-lang-lasalle-property-consultants-india-private-limited-vs-m-a-leasing-and-gjflq