D Mythili (Assistant Commissioner -St) vs J. Manivannan
- CitationCompany Appeal (AT) (CH) No. 75 of 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