Central Board Of Trustees Employees ... vs Ms. Bhavi Shreyans Shah Resolution ...
- CitationCompany Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 2078 of 2024
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The NCLAT's jurisdiction to condone delay in filing an appeal against an order under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code is limited to a further 15 days beyond the 30-day period prescribed by the proviso to Section 61(2), so an appeal filed beyond that outer limit cannot be admitted, and an application for condonation of delay exceeding that period must be rejected, with the memo of appeal rejected consequentially.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
IN THE MATTER OF: Bank of India ...Appellant
Versus
Techno Forge Ltd. ...Respondent
Present: For Appellant : Mr. Kanhaiya Singhal, Advocate. For Respondent : Mr. Atul Sharma, Ms. Aditi Sharma, Advocates.
ORDER
(Hybrid Mode)
09.12.2024: I.A. No. 7446 of 2024: This is an application praying for
condonation of refiling delay of 56 days. Sufficient cause has been shown in
Para 5 and 8 of the application to condone the delay. Refiling delay is
condoned.
I.A. No. 7758 of 2024: This is an application praying for condonation of
163 days' delay in filing the appeal. The order impugned was passed on
02.02.2024. Learned counsel for the Appellant submits that the Appellant
received an email dated 16.02.2024 from the Respondent informing about
passing of the Resolution Plan. The appeal admittedly has been filed with
delay of 163 days.
Our jurisdiction to condone delay is limited to only 15 days in
pursuance to Section 61 (2) proviso. The delay in the present appeal is beyond
condonable period. The Application cannot be allowed, hence, Application
Cont'd.../ 2
for Condonation of Delay is rejected. In result, Memo of Appeal is also
rejected.
[Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson
[Barun Mitra] Member (Technical)
[Arun Baroka] Member (Technical) Archana/nn
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No.2078 of 2024
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