# In the matter of Mr. Anuj Gupta Vs. Stressed Assets Stabilisation Fund & Anr. Company Appeal (AT) (Ins) No. 15 of 2021

> NCLAT judgment dated 2022-09-22. Citation: TCN-2022-NCLAT-00193. The case involves an appeal against the admission of an insolvency petition under Section 7…

- **Court:** NCLAT
- **Order date:** 22 Sept 2022
- **Citation:** TCN-2022-NCLAT-00193
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclat-new-delhi/mr-anuj-gupta-vs-stressed-assets-stabilisation-fund-anr-company-appeal-d5c8b138

## Summary

### Background

The case involves an appeal against the admission of an insolvency petition under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal, Ahmedabad, Indore Bench). The petition was filed by Stressed Assets Stabilisation Fund (SASF) against Hotline Glass Ltd. The appellant, Mr. Anuj Gupta, challenged the admission on the grounds that the petition was time-barred and that SASF lacked the requisite authority to file the petition. The appellant argued that the date of default was fixed and that the loan recall notice did not extend the limitation period. The respondent, SASF, contended that the corporate debtor had acknowledged the debt in various instances, including OTS proposals and balance sheets,

…

## Facts

Mr. Anuj Gupta, the appellant, filed an appeal against the admission of an insolvency petition against Hotline Glass Ltd., the corporate debtor. The insolvency petition was filed by Stressed Assets Stabilisation Fund (SASF), the respondent. IDBI had provided financial assistance to Hotline Glass Ltd. in the form of Non-Convertible Debentures (NCDs) amounting to Rs. 31.71 Crore in 1999. SASF acquired the debt from IDBI. The date of default was 10.09.2003. A demand notice was issued on 17.06.2008. The corporate debtor filed a reference under Section 15 of the SICA in 2007, which was dismissed in 2009 but remanded in 2010. The corporate debtor submitted OTS proposals in 2005, which were later withdrawn. The corporate debtor acknowledged the debt in its balance sheets

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the insolvency petition filed by SASF against Hotline Glass Ltd. was time-barred under the …

**Ratio:** Section 18 of the Limitation Act states that acknowledgment of debt extends the

…

**Reasoning:** The court considered the various acknowledgments of debt by the corporate debtor in its

…

**Interpretation:** Section 18 of the Limitation Act is interpreted to mean that any clear

…

**Application:** The court found that the corporate debtor had acknowledged the debt multiple

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** Rakesh…; Ashok Kumar…
- **Appellants:** Anuj G…
- **Respondents:** Hotline Gla…; Stressed Assets…

## Timeline

- **1999-03-24 — Allotment o…**: Corporate Debtor allotted Non-Convertible…
- **2003-09-10 — Date of D…**: Corporate Debtor defaulted in…

## Legal provisions

- [Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Section 7 — Initiation of corporate insolvency resolution…](https://caseease.in/legal-provisions/insolvency-and-bankruptcy-code-2016/section-7)

---

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/nclat-new-delhi/mr-anuj-gupta-vs-stressed-assets-stabilisation-fund-anr-company-appeal-d5c8b138