Breaking SUPREME COURT CRACKS DOWN ON HOME LOAN SUBVENTION FRAUD: CBI PROBE EXPEDITED, 30-DAY SANCTION DEADLINE FOR BANK OFFICIALS
New Delhi · Saturday, 08 August 2026 9888666310 | [email protected]
Free Law — free judgments and free headnotes Free Lawby De Jure
Supreme Court of India 2018-10-11 remanded

B.K. Educational Services Private Limited vs Parag Gupta And Associates

Bench: 2 — R.F. Nariman

In Brief

This landmark judgment clarifies that the Limitation Act, 1963 applies to insolvency applications filed under Sections 7 and 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code from its inception (1 December 2016), not merely after the insertion of Section 238A in June 2018. The Supreme Court held that "default" under the Code requires a debt that is due and legally payable — excluding time-barred claims — because the Limitation Act applies via Section 433 of the Companies Act. Consequently, applications seeking to resurrect debts time-barred beyond three years cannot be admitted unless Section 5 of the Limitation Act (condonation of delay) applies. The Court rejected arguments that Section 238A was merely prospective, finding it clarificatory of the legislature's original intent not to revive stale or dead claims through the insolvency process.

The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.

Insolvency and Bankruptcy Limitation Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process Procedure Statutory Interpretation National Company Law Tribunal Time-Barred Debts Financial Creditors Operational Creditors

Read the full judgment & headnote. It's free.

Register to read the complete Supreme Court judgment text and the headnote, and to search 1 lakh+ Supreme Court judgments by meaning. It is a free service.

Register Free Login