Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 – s.238A (As insertedby Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (Second Amendment) Act, 2018w.e.f. 06.06.2018) – s.238A, if retrospective in nature – Held: s.238Abeing clarificatory of law and being procedural in nature, must beheld to be retrospective – Amendment of s.238A would not serve itsobject unless it is construed as being retrospective, as otherwise,applications seeking to resurrect time-barred claims would have tobe allowed, not being governed by the law of limitation – LimitationAct, 1963.Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 – s.238A (As insertedby Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (Second Amendment) Act, 2018w.e.f. 06.06.2018) and ss.7 & 9 – Application for initiation of‘Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process’ – Whether Limitation Act,1963 will apply to applications that are made u/s.7 and/or s.9 ofthe Code on and from its commencement on 01.12.2016 – Held:Since, Limitation Act is applicable to applications filed u/ss. 7 and9 of the Code from the inception of the Code, Art.137 of the LimitationAct gets attracted – “The right to sue”, therefore, accrues when adefault occurs – If the default has occurred over three years priorto the date of filing of the application, the application would bebarred u/Art.137 of the Limitation Act, save and except in thosecases where, in facts of the case, s.5 of the Limitation Act may beapplied to condone delay in filing such application – LimitationAct, 1963 – Art.137 and s.5.