Gopal Krishna Grover & Anr vs Kgk Realty & India Private Limited & Ors
- CitationCompany Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 632 of 2024
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The Tribunal's refusal to condone delay rests on the following reasoning: the appellant's plea of unawareness of the CIRP does not, on the facts before the Tribunal, justify condonation of a 239-day delay, and the Tribunal follows its own earlier decision in Sumit Singh Basisth v. Sare Gurugram Pvt. Ltd., which rejected condonation on the same grounds (identical corporate debtor, identical pleas), so that the same reasoning governs here.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
IN THE MATTER OF: Gopal Krishan Grover & Anr. ...Appellants Versus KGK Realty (India) Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. ...Respondents
Present: For Appellants : Mr. Chandra Bhushan Prasad, Mr. Kanishk Raj and Mr. Amolak, Advocates. For Respondents : Mr. Ajay Bhargava, Ms. Wamika Trehan, Ms. Vanita Bhargava, Ms. Raddhika Khanna Tandon and Mr. Siddhant Kumar, Advocates for SRA.
ORDER
(Hybrid Mode)
16.04.2024 : This is an application praying for condonation of 239 days
delay in filing the Appeal. Order impugned was passed on 24.04.2023 and
this Appeal was e-filed on 18.01.2024.
Learned Counsel for the Appellant submits that the Appellant was not
aware of the CIRP hence he could not approach the Court earlier.
Learned Counsel for the Respondent has relied on the Judgment of this
Tribunal with regard to the same Corporate Debtor, the applications praying
for condonation of delay has been rejected where same grounds were raised.
He has referred to the Order passed by this Tribunal in I.A. No. 808/2024 in
Comp. App. (AT) (Ins.) No. 138/2024 in the matter of `Sumit Singh Basisth'
Vs. `Sare Gurugram Pvt. Ltd. & Anr.' decided on 22.03.2024.
Following the above order of this Tribunal, we see no reason to condone
the delay.
Delay condonation is rejected. Memo of Appeal is also rejected.
[Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson
[Barun Mitra] Member (Technical)
[Arun Baroka] Member (Technical) himanshu/nn
Comp. App. (AT) (Ins.) No. 632 of 2024 & I.A. No. 2269 of 2024 2 of 2
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