Deepak Kulkarni vs Bank Of Maharashtra
- CitationCompany Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No.319 of 2023
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
Where an earlier appeal challenging the same order has already been dismissed as time-barred, the Tribunal will not entertain a second appeal against that order by another person acting for the same corporate debtor, because the subsequent appeal is hopelessly barred by time and an abuse of the process of the Court.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
Deepak Kulkarni ...Appellant
Versus
Bank of Maharashtra ...Respondent
Present: For Appellant: Mr. Yash Chaturvedi, Advocate.
For Respondent: Mr. Nishant Awana, Advocate for R-1. Mr. Abhijeet Sinha and Mr. Varun Kalra, Advocates for RP. Mr. Akshay Bector, Mr. Pranjit Bhattacharya and Ms. Raj Sarit Khare, Advocates for SRA.
ORDER
17.03.2023: I.A. No. 1088 of 2023: This is an application praying for
condonation of delay of 1244 days. This appeal has been filed on 21.02.2023
against the order dated 26.09.2019 passed by the Adjudicating Authority.
2. In the application for condonation of delay it has been mentioned that
Company Appeal (AT) (Ins) No. 414 of 2022 was filed by the Directors of the
Corporate Debtor in August, 2021 against the same order, which Appeal was
dismissed by this Tribunal by order dated 19.04.2022.
3. We fail to see that when an appeal against the same order on the ground
that it is barred by time was dismissed since delay condonation application
was rejected, how another appeal can be filed by one Director challenging the
Cont'd.../ -2-
same order. The earlier appeal although was filed in the name of the
Corporate Debtor but was signed by the Director. Hence, there is no occasion
to file this Appeal again against the same order. The Appeal is hopelessly
barred by time and is abuse of the process of the Court. We dismiss the
application as barred by time. The Memo of Appeal is rejected.
[Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson
[Barun Mitra] Member (Technical) Archana/nn
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 319 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