Amit Narendra Patel vs Sunil Kumar Kabra, Resolution ...
- CitationCompany Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1429 of 2019
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The Appellate Tribunal has no jurisdiction to condone a delay beyond the statutory outer limit for filing an appeal, so an appeal filed after delay exceeding that limit cannot be entertained and the application for condonation of delay must be rejected. Liquidation of a corporate debtor does not by itself bar revival of the company; the corporate debtor may still seek revival after an order of liquidation has been passed, as held in the Tribunal's earlier decision in Y. Shivram Prasad v. S. Dhanapal.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
Mr. Amit Narendra Patel ...Appellant
Versus
Mr. Sunil Kumar Kabra, Resolution Professional Danke Electricals Ltd. ...Respondent
Present: For Appellant: Mr. Akshat Khare, Mr. Ajay Kohli, Mr. S. S. Sobti and Ms. Priyanka Ghorawat, Advocates
For Respondent: Mr. P.V. Dinesh, Mr. Ashwini Kr. Singh and Ms. Sindhu T.P., Advocates
ORDER
11.12.2019 This appeal has been filed after delay of 137 days. Learned
counsel for the Appellant submits that brother of the Appellant is suffering from
Cancer. However, as this Appellate Tribunal has no jurisdiction to entertain an
appeal beyond 15 days after 30 days of filing the appeal, the petition for
condonation is rejected.
This apart, we find that the order of 'Liquidation' was passed on 12th June,
2019 and even thereafter, the 'Corporate Debtor' can revive the company in the
light of this Appellate Tribunal's decision in "Y. Shivram Prasad Vs. S.
Dhanapal & Ors.-Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 224 of 2018 etc."
disposed of on 27th February, 2019.
-2-
For the reasons aforesaid, the appeal is dismissed.
[Justice S.J. Mukhopadhaya] Chairperson
[Justice Bansi Lal Bhat] Member (Judicial)
[Justice Venugopal M.] Member (Judicial)
/ns/gc
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1429 of 2019
This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.
Research this judgment with Miss Lucy
Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.
Try Miss Lucy free