# In the matter of State Bank of India vs. Hackbridge Hewittic and Easun Limited I.A. No. 614 of 2021 in Company Appeal (AT) (CH) (Ins.) No. 05 of 2021

> NCLAT judgment dated 2023-04-10. Citation: TCN-2023-NCLAT-00636. The case involves an appeal against an order dated 06.01.2021 passed by the Adjudicating…

- **Court:** NCLAT
- **Order date:** 10 Apr 2023
- **Citation:** TCN-2023-NCLAT-00636
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclat-new-delhi/state-bank-of-india-vs-hackbridge-hewittic-and-easun-limited-ia-no-614-of-2021-i-afe60386

## Summary

### Background

The case involves an appeal against an order dated 06.01.2021 passed by the Adjudicating Authority/National Company Law Tribunal, Division Bench-I, Chennai in IBA/1178/2019, which dismissed a petition filed under the Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code, 2016. The appellant, State Bank of India, claimed that the Adjudicating Authority erred in dismissing their application under Section 7 of the I&B Code based on limitation, without considering relevant facts such as the One Time Settlement (OTS) proposal by the respondent, Hackbridge Hewittic and Easun Limited. The appellant argued that the respondent had no objection to the admission of the application under Section 7 and the initiation of the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process. The appellant also contended that

…

## Facts

State Bank of India (SBI), the appellant, sought to initiate Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) against Hackbridge Hewittic and Easun Limited, the respondent, under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC), 2016. SBI claimed that Hackbridge Hewittic and Easun Limited was a guarantor for loans availed by Victory Electricals Ltd., the principal borrower. The account of Victory Electricals Ltd. was declared a Non-Performing Asset (NPA) on 06.06.2012 due to defaults in working capital and term loan facilities. SBI issued a notice under Section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act on 28.06.2013. The principal borrower submitted several One Time Settlement (OTS) proposals, the first one on 13.03.2014 for Rs. 50 Crores, which SBI rejected. SBI issued an OTS

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the Adjudicating Authority erred in dismissing the application under Section 7 of the …

**Ratio:** Section 18 of the Limitation Act, 1963 states that where, before the expiration of the

…

**Reasoning:** The Appellate Tribunal reasoned that the Adjudicating Authority failed to properly

…

**Interpretation:** The interpretation of Section 18 of the Limitation Act is crucial in

…

**Application:** In this case, the Appellate Tribunal applied the principles of Section 18 of

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** Naresh Sa…; M. Venu…
- **Appellants:** State Bank of…
- **Respondents:** Victory Electrical…; Hackbridge…

## Timeline

- **2012-06-06 — Account decla…**: Account of Victory Electricals Ltd.…
- **2013-06-28 — SARFAESI…**: Appellant issued notice under…

## Legal provisions

- [Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Section 5(8) — Definitions](https://caseease.in/legal-provisions/insolvency-and-bankruptcy-code-2016/section-5)

---

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/state-bank-of-india-vs-hackbridge-hewittic-and-easun-limited-ia-no-614-of-2021-i-afe60386