Driven by excellence, focused on strategies for the longer term.

This is the crux of who we are. It is an articulation of precision in purpose, from the Firm’s beginnings to where we are today. Our collective eye is unerringly trained on tomorrow.

Deep sectoral expertise across services and industries.

Our insistence on strategic advisory exacts an in-depth understanding of and involvement with our clients’ businesses and industries. We engage not just individual businesses, but also contribute to the country’s legal and regulatory frameworks.

Personal commitment supported by experience and grit.

We commit early. We pull together internally for greater support. Every effort is sincere, every individual deeply dedicated to their task, their role, to the Firm.

Our undertakings for long-term impact are an organic extension of our purpose.

They are to employ our deep knowledge of the law beyond the business, the transaction, the deal. To use the opportunities and skills we possess, to reflect on the culture we’re creating. Individually and collectively, these are our efforts to help shape the thinking of our future generations, and arm them with strategies for true, sustainable growth.

Knowledge-sharing is intrinsic to equity and inclusivity.

This is a repository of thought leadership, deep insights and strong viewpoints, legal and other news and events and how they impact the industry and our clients.

Relevance is critical to growth. It necessitates a firm that is dynamic and responsive.

Amplifying intrinsic talent, sharpening skills, expanding knowledge, is vital to leading. It defines every aspect of how our firm functions and transacts. This is how we create new benchmarks and set industry standards.

  • Connect
Sep 30, 2020

SC Rules on Applicability of Limitation Act on IBC

The Supreme Court (‘SC’) in the case of Babulal Vardharji Gurjar v. Veer Gurjar Aluminium Industries Pvt. Ltd.[1] while upholding its judgement of B.K. Educational Services v. Paras Gupta & Associates[2], has held that the three year period of limitation from the date of default for an application for initiation of the corporate insolvency resolution process (‘CIRP’) under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (‘IBC’) is only extendable under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, if an appropriate case for condonation of delay is made out. SC further observed that while ‘date of acknowledgement of debt’ may extend the limitation as per Section 18 of the Limitation Act, 1963 the same is only relevant for recovery suits and is not applicable for initiation of CIRP under the IBC.

 

[1] Babulal Vardharji Gurjar v. Veer Gurjar Aluminium Industries Pvt. Ltd., 2020 SCC OnLine SC 647.

[2] B.K. Educational Services v. Paras Gupta & Associates, AIR 2018 SC 5601.

TAGS

SHARE

Subscribe

DISCLAIMER

These are the views and opinions of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Firm. This article is intended for general information only and does not constitute legal or other advice and you acknowledge that there is no relationship (implied, legal or fiduciary) between you and the author/AZB. AZB does not claim that the article's content or information is accurate, correct or complete, and disclaims all liability for any loss or damage caused through error or omission.

RELATED READING

Inter Alia

Supreme Court Lays Down Yardsticks to Initiate Proceedings for Offence of Perjury

Oct 30, 2024 | Dispute Resolution
Inter Alia

Directives Regarding Measures to Curb Misuse of Headers and Content Templates for Making Commercial Communication

Oct 30, 2024 | Media & Telecommunications
Inter Alia

Remittances to IFSCs under Liberalised Remittance Scheme

Oct 30, 2024 | Banking & Finance Financial Services Regulatory & Securities