Gangotri Tracon Pvt. Ltd vs Rachna Anchalia

IN THE MATTER OF: Gangotri Tracon Pvt. Ltd. ...Appellant

Versus

Rachna Anchalia & Anr. ...Respondents

Present: For Appellant: Present but appearance not marked. For Respondent: Ms. Ekta Choudhary, Mr. Ayush Kumar, Ms. Rushali Sikand, Advocates for RP.

ORDER

(Hybrid Mode)

04.07.2025: Heard Ld. Counsel for the Appellant as well as Ld.

Counsel for the Respondent this appeal has been filed against the impugned

order passed by the Adjudicating Authority dated 13.07.2023 by rejecting

the I.A. No. 1197/KB/2023 for condonation of delay of 216 days in filing the

claims with the RP. Aggrieved of the impugned order, rejecting the

application filed by the Appellant this appeal has been filed. The CIRP of the

Corporate Debtor commenced on 22.08.2022 and the last date for receipt of

claims was on 05.09.2022.

The CoC also approved the resolution plan 11.05.2023. It was

thereafter on 23.05.2023 claim in Form-C was filed as the Financial

Creditor. The applicant has prayed for condonation of delay of 216 days

which has been rejected. The Adjudicating Authority in the impugned order 2

has observed that publication was made in local newspaper Business

Standard & Economic Times.

Ld. Counsel for the Respondent refuting the submission, submit that

the claims have not been filed before the RP within time and the Appellant is

a commercial entity. After approved of the CoC the same could not have

been admitted.

Ld. Counsel for the Respondent also relied on the Judgement of

Supreme Court in RPS Infrastructure Ltd. vs. Mukul Kumar & Anr. decided

on 20.02.20217.

We have heard learned counsel for the parties and here perused on

record the present case. CoC had resolution plan approved the plan and

appellant filed its claim with the condonation of delay of 216 days. Appellant

being a commercial entity was required to Act diligently when the

publication was made in the newspapers of Economic Times & Business

Standard.

Counsel for the Appellant submitted that the publication was made in

only on Kolkata addition aforesaid of newspaper. The resolution plan having

been approved by the CoC in view of the Judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme

Court in RPS Infrastructure Ltd. vs. Mukul Kumar & Anr, no new claim can

be entertained after approval of the resolution plan.

Company Appeal (AT) (Ins.) No. 1092 of 2023 3

We are of the view that the Adjudicating Authority did not commit any

error in rejecting the application of the appellant praying for condonation of

delay of 216 days. Appeal is dismissed.

[Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson

[Arun Baroka] Member (Technical) Abhishek/md

Company Appeal (AT) (Ins.) No. 1092 of 2023