Commissioner Of Customs (Preventive) vs Thiru Arooran Sugars Pvt Ltd & Ors
- CitationCompany Appeal No. 58/2023
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The Appellate Tribunal's refusal to entertain the appeal rests on the following: an appeal preferred under Section 61 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code is subject to the limitation prescribed in the proviso to Section 61(2), and delay beyond the statutory period, and beyond the further condonable period stated in that proviso, cannot be condoned; an application seeking condonation of delay that falls outside that condonable period must be rejected, and the appeal that depends on it falls with it.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
In the matter of : Commissioner of Customs (Preventive) ... Appellant V Thiru Arooran Sugars Ltd, Rep by its Liquidator & 2 Ors. ... Respondents
Present: For Appellant : No Appearance
ORDER
(Hybrid Mode)
30.01.2026:
This Company Appeal challenges the order of 02.05.2022, that was
passed in CP(CAA)/30/CHE/2022 in CA(CAA)/113/CHE/2021 in
IBA/243/2019. The impugned order under challenge was rendered in the
proceedings under Section 230 (1) of the Companies Act, and Section 66 of the
Companies Act, 2013, to be read along with the applicable provisions contained
under the I&B Code.
Be that as it may. After the dismissal of the proceedings of the Company
Petition on 02.05.2022, the Appellant has approached this Tribunal by filing a
Company Appeal No. 58/2023 invoking the provisions contained under Section
421 of the Companies Act. That was decided against the Appellant, holding
that, the Company Appeal under Section 421 of the Companies Act, would not
CA (AT) (CH) (Ins) No. 57/2026 Page 1 of 2 be maintainable as decided by the judgment rendered by us on 30.08.2025. It
was thereafter that the instant Company Appeal has been preferred, which is
accompanied with a Condone Delay Application praying for condonation of
1297 days of delay. Since, the Appeal has been preferred under Section 61 of
I&B Code and the number of days of delay that has been sought to be condoned
is much beyond the prescribed statutory period, as contemplated under the
proviso to sub-section 2 of Section 61 and even much beyond the condonable
period as given therein, the Condone Delay application IA No. 145/2026 would
stand rejected. As a consequence thereto, the Company Appeal too would stand
rejected. All Interlocutory Applications would stand closed.
[Justice Sharad Kumar Sharma] Member (Judicial)
[Jatindranath Swain] Member (Technical)
YS/MS/AK
CA (AT) (CH) (Ins) No. 57/2026 Page 2 of 2
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