Back
NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
Mohd. Faiz Alam Khan, Judicial Member
Encore Asset Reconstruction Company Pvt. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Pandhe Constructions Pvt. Ltd. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual background of guarantee, defaults, notices, and assignment. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 18 , 20) |
| 2. appellant argues exclusion of covid period for limitation. (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 3. respondent contends petition time-barred post-covid extension. (Para 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 4. full exclusion of 15.03.2020-28.02.2022 from limitation period. (Para 19 , 22 , 23 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34) |
| 5. guarantor default triggers on demand notice per guarantee terms. (Para 21 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27) |
| 6. unchallenged nclt findings on default date bind parties. (Para 28 , 29 , 37 , 39 , 40 , 41) |
| 7. invocation of guarantee depends on notice terms and facts. (Para 35 , 36 , 38 , 42) |
| 8. remand for fresh consideration of limitation and evidence. (Para 43 , 44 , 45) |
JUDGMENT
(Hybrid Mode)
[Per: Justice Mohd. Faiz Alam Khan, Member (Judicial)]
The instant appeal has been preferred by the Appellant under Section 61 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (in short ‘Code’) against the order dated 11.10.2024 (in short ‘impugned order’) passed by the NCLT, Mumbai Bench (in short ‘Adjudicating Authority’) in CP (IB) No. 995/MB/2023 filed under Section 7 of the Code by the Appellant wher
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
