Brij Ballabh Chandak & Ors vs Shanti Sagar Realty India Private ...
- CitationCompany Appeal (AT) (Ins) No. 1920 of 2025
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The reasoning here is confined to limitation and condonation of delay. The court holds that the day on which the impugned order was passed is excluded when computing the limitation period, so that the period runs from the following day, and on that computation the appeal, filed on the 45th day, falls within the condonable period. It further holds that where the appellants are homebuyers and have shown sufficient reasons in their application, sufficient cause is established and the delay is condoned.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI Company Appeal (AT) (Ins) No. 1920 of 2025 & I.A. No. 7475 of 2025 IN THE MATTER OF: Brij Ballabh Chandak & Ors. ...Appellants Versus Shanti Sagar Reality India Pvt. Ltd. ...Respondents
Present: For Appellant : Ms. Arati Agarwal, Ms. Nehal Anchila and Mr. Alok Kumar, Advocates. For Respondents : Present but appearance not marked.
ORDER
(Hybrid Mode)
16.01.2026: I.A. No. 7475 of 2025
This is an application condonation of 15 days delay in filing the appeal.
Counsel for the respondent submits that delay in filing the appeal is 16 days
since the order was passed on 25.08.2025 and it has been e-filed on
10.10.2025. Ld. Counsel for the respondent further submits that there are no
explanation given for even 15 days delay in the application.
2. We have considered submissions of the parties and perused the record.
3. The order was passed on 25.08.2025 and the appeal has been e-filed on
10.10.2025 the day on which the order was passed has to be excluded for
computation of limitation and computing the limitation from 26.08.2025 the
appeal is filed on 45th day. Thus, the application is within condonable period.
The appellant are homebuyers who have been given sufficient reasons in
paragraph-4 to 9 of the application. We find sufficient cause shown. Delay is
condoned.
CA (AT) (Ins) No. 1920 of 2025
4. Issue Notice.
5. Ld. Counsel for the respondent no.1 appears and accepts notice. He is
allowed three weeks time to file a Reply-Affidavit.
6. Rejoinder, if any, may be filed within two weeks, thereafter.
List on 11.03.2026.
[Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson
[Barun Mitra] Member (Technical) harleen/MD
2 of 2 Company Appeal (AT) (Ins) No. 1920 of 2025
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