Anurag Kumar Sinha vs Rajmal Mangilal Jain

IN THE MATTER OF: Anurag Kumar Sinha ...Appellants Versus Rajmal Mangilal Jain & Ors. ...Respondents

Present: For Appellant : Mr. Santosh Kumar, Advocate.

For Respondents : None.

WITH Company Appeal (AT) (Ins) No. 1796 of 2025 & I.A. No. 6873 of 2025

IN THE MATTER OF: Anurag Kumar Sinha ...Appellants Versus Rajmal Mangilal Jain & Ors. ...Respondents

Present: For Appellant : Mr. Santosh Kumar, Advocate.

For Respondents : None.

ORDER

(Hybrid Mode)

25.11.2025: Heard counsel for the appellant.

2. These two appeals have been filed along with applications IA-

6875/2025 and 6873/2025 praying for condonation of refiling delay. The

appeal has been filed against the order passed on 08.01.2025. There is a

refiling delay of 274 days in filing the appeal. In the entire application praying

for condonation of delay runs in 6 paragraphs which are as follows:-

"1. That the aforesaid appeal has been filled before this Hon'ble court on 31/12/2024, wherein detail facts and circumstances of the present case has been stated, and same are not repeated herein again for the sake of brevity and craves leave of this Hon'ble court to refer and rely upon the same for the present application also.

02. That upon filing of present appeal, some detects were reported by the registry of this Hon'ble court vide Defects sheet dated 08/01/2025. Thereafter the advocate for the Appellant sent entire original file of the present appeal to the office of the local advocate at Delhi to cure defects and to do needful for listing of the present appeal before this Hon'ble Appellate Tribunal.

03. That It is respectfully submitted here that upon receipt of the case file by the office of the Advocate at Delhi, it was kept by one of the staff/ clerk of the Advocate at Delhi but it got misplaced. Despite ail efforts made it could not be traced.

04. That it is recently on 8th October, 2025 during the course of cleaning and rearrangement of office of the Advocate at Delhi the case file has been traced, tagged with the disposed off file.

05. That upon finding the original case file, appellant has been informed and present appeal has been refiled after removal of all defects.

06. That it is humbly submitted here that in the aforesaid facts and circumstances a delay of 274 days has occurred in refiling of the present appeal, which is neither intentional nor deliberate but only due to the aforesaid

2 of 3 Company Appeal (AT) (Ins) Nos. 1795 & 1796 of 2025 bonafide reasons, which may be condoned, failing which applicant shall suffer irreparable loss, for his no fault."

3. We do not find any satisfactorily explanation for inordinate delay of 274

days in refiling the appeal in the above paragraphs. Appeal arises out of

proceedings under insolvency and there being no satisfactorily explanation in

the application, we are unable to condone the delay as prayed for therefore IA

No. 6875 of 2025 and IA No. 6873 of 2025 are rejected and simultaneously

memo of appeal is also rejected.

[Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson

[Barun Mitra] Member (Technical) harleen/MD

3 of 3 Company Appeal (AT) (Ins) Nos. 1795 & 1796 of 2025