Miss Lucy
← All judgments

D Mythili (Assistant Commissioner -St) vs J. Manivannan

National Company Law Appellate Tribunal6 November 2023

Ratio decidendi

The rule this decision rests on

The Appellate Tribunal under Section 421 of the Companies Act, 2013 has no jurisdiction to condone a delay in filing an appeal beyond the outer limit of 45 days (the initial 45 days plus the proviso's further 45 days), and an application seeking condonation of delay beyond that period is not maintainable and must be dismissed; consequently, the appeal itself, being filed out of time, is not duly constituted and stands dismissed.

Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.

Judgment

As delivered

NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHENNAI BENCH Company Appeal (AT) (CH) No. 75 of 2023 (IA No. 1009 of 2023) IN THE MATTER OF: State of Tamil Nadu, State Tax Department Rep. by its Asst. Commissioner Tmt. J. Shajee ...Appellant Versus J. Manivannan, Liquidator, M/s. Erwin Textiles Mills Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. ...Respondents Present For Appellant : Mr. B. Vijay, Addl. Govt. Pleader For Respondents : Mr. J. Manivannan, Advocate, For R1

ORDER

(Virtual Mode)

06.11.2023: I.A. No. 1009 of 2023

This order shall be dispose of I.A. No. 1009 of 2023 through which the

appellant has prayed for condonation of delay of 294 days. The present appeal

has been filed under Section 421 of the Companies Act, 2013. Section 421 is

reproduced as under:

Section 421: Appeal from orders of Tribunal.

"421. (1) Any person aggrieved by an order of the Tribunal may prefer an appeal to the Appellate Tribunal. (2) No appeal shall lie to the Appellate Tribunal from an order made by the Tribunal with the consent of parties. (3) Every appeal under sub-section (1) shall be filed within a period of forty-five days from the date on which a copy of the order of the Tribunal is made available to the person aggrieved and shall be in such form, and accompanied by such fees, as may be prescribed:

Provided that the Appellate Tribunal may entertain an appeal after the expiry of the said period of forty-five -2- days from the date aforesaid, but within a further period not exceeding forty-five days, if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal within that period. (4) On the receipt of an appeal under sub-section (1), the Appellate Tribunal shall, after giving the parties to the appeal a reasonable opportunity of being heard, pass such orders thereon as it thinks fit, confirming, modifying or setting aside the order appealed against. (5) The Appellate Tribunal shall send a copy of every order made by it to the Tribunal and the parties to appeal".

As per the scheme of Section 421 any person who is aggrieved by order of

the tribunal may prefer an appeal to the Appellate Authority but every such

appeal has to be filed within a period of 45 days from the date on which copy of

the order of the Tribunal is made available to the person aggrieved and shall be

in such form and accompanied by such fees as may be prescribed. Proviso to

Section 421 (3) further extends the period of 45 days to file the appeal if the

tribunal is satisfied that it was prevented by sufficient cause in not filing the

appeal within that period. Meaning thereby the total period granted by the

statute is 45+45 days for the purpose of filing of appeal. In this case, the

impugned order was passed on 16.03.2022. Period of 45 days for filing of the

appeal expired on 30.04.2022 and further period of 45 days expired on

15.06.2022. Whereas in the present case even the certified copy was applied by

the appellant on 22.12.2022 much after the expiry of the period of 90 days as

stated herein above.

Company Appeal (AT) (CH) No. 75 of 2023 (IA No. 1009 of 2023) -3-

In such circumstances and following the dictum of the Hon'ble Supreme

Court in the case of 'National Spot Exchange vs. Mr. Anil Kohli RP for Dunar

Foods Limited' in SCC Online SC 716, 2021 this court does not enjoy the

jurisdiction to condone the delay beyond the period of 45 days in any case. The

application is thus found to be without any merit as the same is not

maintainable and hence the same is hereby dismissed.

Company Appeal (AT) (CH) No. 75 of 2023

Since we have dismissed the application of condonation of delay by an

order of even date, therefore, the present appeal is not found duly constituted

as the same is hereby dismissed. No costs.

[Justice Rakesh Kumar Jain] Member (Judicial)

[Shreesha Merla] Member (Technical)

sr/rr/kr Company Appeal (AT) (CH) No. 75 of 2023 (IA No. 1009 of 2023)

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