Board Of Trustees For Syama Prasad ... vs Mr. Vijay Kumar V. Iyer The Liquidator ...
- CitationCompany Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 898-899 of 2022
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The Tribunal's power to condone delay in filing an appeal under Section 61 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 is limited to a further period of 15 days beyond the statutory limitation; where the delay exceeds that period, the Tribunal has no power to condone it, and the appeal must be rejected as barred by time, irrespective of any extension of limitation granted by the Supreme Court in Suo Moto Writ Petition No. 1 of 2021 for proceedings whose limitation expired during the pandemic period, where the appeal was filed after the extended period had ended. Where an appeal is held barred by time and rejected, a request that the Adjudicating Authority be directed to decide a pending application is not a matter the Appellate Tribunal can entertain; the appellant must approach the Adjudicating Authority itself for such relief.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
Board of Trustees for Syama Prasad Mookherjee Port, ...Appellant Kolkata
Versus
Mr. Vijay Kumar V. Iyer, ...Respondents The Liquidator, Bharati Defence and Infrastructure Ltd.
Present: For Appellant: Mr. Udayaditya Banerjee, Mr. Samrat Sengupta, Ms. Namrata Saraogi, Advocates For Respondent: Mr. Akshay Sapre, Mr. Naman Kamdar, Mr. Abhishek Swaroop, Advocates
ORDER
08.08.2022: I.A. No. 2529-2530 of 2022 has been filed in this Appeal
seeking condonation of delay in filing this Appeal.
2. This Appeal has been filed under Section 61 of the Insolvency and
Bankruptcy Code, 2016 challenging the Order dated 15th March, 2021 and
08th April, 2021 passed in I.A. No. 817 of 2021 in CP(IB) No. 292/MB/2017 by
the National Company Law Tribunal, Mumbai Bench. This Appeal has been
filed in this Tribunal on 08th July, 2020 and e-filed on 2nd July, 2022.
3. Learned Counsel for the Appellant has referred to the Judgement of the
Hon'ble Supreme Court in Suo Moto Writ Petition No. 1 of 2021. Learned
Counsel for the Appellant submits that in view of the Orders passed by the
Hon'ble Supreme Court, the limitation was extended for those whose limitation -2-
expired between 15th March, 2020 and 28th February, 2022 for a period of
further 90 days which expired on 30th May, 2022.
4. This Appeal having been filed subsequent to 30th May, 2022 and the
power to condone the delay conferred to this Tribunal is only of 15 days and
the delay being more than 15 days this Tribunal is unable to condone the delay
as prayed for. The Delay Condonation Application is dismissed. In result, the
Memo of Appeal is rejected.
5. Learned Counsel for the Appellant lastly submits that Adjudicating
Authority be directed to consider and decide the I.A. 817 of 2021. When we
are not entertaining the Appeal and has held it to be barred by time it is for
the Appellant to approach the Adjudicating Authority to make any such
request.
The Appeal is dismissed, accordingly.
[Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson
[Mr. Barun Mitra] Member (Technical)
Basant/nn
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 898-899/2022
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