The case involves a civil appeal (No. 910/2021) before the Supreme Court of India. The appeal was called for hearing on April 5, 2021. The appellant, State Bank of India, is challenging a judgment by the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT). The appellant argues that the NCLAT's interpretation of Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code 2016, in conjunction with Article 137 of the Limitation Act 1963, is incorrect.
The State Bank of India filed a Civil Appeal No(s).910/2021 before the Supreme Court of India against Krishidhan Seeds Pvt. Ltd. The appeal challenges the judgment of the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) dated 17 November 2020. The appellant argues that the NCLAT incorrectly interpreted Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code 2016 in relation to Article 137 of the Limitation Act 1963. The appellant contends that the limitation period should not commence solely from the date of default and that Section 18 of the Limitation Act 1963 should also apply. The appellant relies on a prior three-judge bench decision of the Supreme Court in Laxmi Pat Surana v Union Bank of India to support their argument. The case was called for hearing on 05-04-2021 and
…Sign in to view the parties.
The National Company…
The Civil Appeal was…
The case involves a civil appeal (No. 910/2021) before the Supreme Court of India. The appeal was called for hearing on April 5, 2021. The appellant, State Bank of India, is challenging a judgment by the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT). The appellant argues that the NCLAT's interpretation of Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code 2016, in conjunction with Article 137 of the Limitation Act 1963, is incorrect.
The State Bank of India filed a Civil Appeal No(s).910/2021 before the Supreme Court of India against Krishidhan Seeds Pvt. Ltd. The appeal challenges the judgment of the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) dated 17 November 2020. The appellant argues that the NCLAT incorrectly interpreted Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code 2016 in relation to Article 137 of the Limitation Act 1963. The appellant contends that the limitation period should not commence solely from the date of default and that Section 18 of the Limitation Act 1963 should also apply. The appellant relies on a prior three-judge bench decision of the Supreme Court in Laxmi Pat Surana v Union Bank of India to support their argument. The case was called for hearing on 05-04-2021 and
…The National Company…
The Civil Appeal was…