Miss Lucy
← All judgments

Deputy Commissioner Customs vs M/S Gujarat Nre Coke Limited @ Anr

National Company Law Appellate Tribunal20 May 2022Ashok Bhushan

Ratio decidendi

The rule this decision rests on

The Adjudicating Authority's rejection of a belated claim, filed after the order of liquidation and after the Liquidator has already disposed of several of the corporate debtor's properties, is not an error where the delay is long and the proceedings are well advanced; a belated claim at such a stage may be refused condonation of delay.

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

Judgment

As delivered

NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNALPRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHICompany Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 511 of 2022IN THE MATTER OF:

Deputy Commissioner Customs Division, Jamnagar ...Appellant

Versus

Gujarat NRE Coke Ltd. & Anr. ...Respondents

Present: For Appellant: Ms. Arunima Dwivedi, Advocate. For Respondents: Mr. Siddharth Sharma and Mr. Arjun Asthana, Advocates for R-2 (Liquidator)

ORDER

(Virtual Mode)

20.05.2022: Heard learned counsel for the Appellant. This Appeal has

been filed against order of the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law

Tribunal) Kolkata Bench, Kolkata dated 18.11.2021 by which order the

application filed by the Applicant/ Appellant for condonation of delay of 1010

days in filing of claim has been rejected.

2. CIRP against the Corporate Debtor was initiated on 07.04.2017. The

order for liquidation was passed on 11.01.2018. Thereafter, a claim on behalf

of the Appellant was submitted on 18.11.2020 which was not accepted by the

Liquidator, hence, an application was filed before the Adjudicating Authority

which came to be rejected.

3. Learned counsel for the Appellant submits that delay was not of 1010

days but it was for about 700 and some odd days. Be that as it may. The

order of liquidation was passed long ago i.e. on 11.01.2018 and CIRP was

initiated in the year 2017.

Cont'd..../ 2

4. Learned counsel for the Appellant after obtaining instructions submits

that further in the liquidation proceedings the Liquidator has already disposed

of several properties of the Corporate Debtor.

5. We do not find any error in the order of the Adjudicating Authority

rejecting the Application at such belated stage. We see no reason to entertain

this Appeal. The Appeal is dismissed.

[Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson

[Shreesha Merla] Member (Technical)

[Naresh Salecha] Member (Technical) Archana/nn

Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 511 of 2022

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