Ifci Ltd vs Amtek Auto Ltd
- CitationCompany Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 614 of 2018
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The Appellate Tribunal has no jurisdiction to condone delay in filing an appeal under sub-section (2) of Section 61 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 beyond the fifteen-day period that follows the thirty-day period prescribed for filing such an appeal; an application for condonation of delay beyond that outer limit must therefore be rejected. Where the appeal is filed outside the prescribed period of limitation and the application for condonation of delay is rejected for want of jurisdiction, the appeal is not maintainable and stands dismissed as barred by limitation.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
For Appellant : Mr. Neeraj Kumar Jain, Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Krishan Kumar and Mr. Atul Sheopuri, Advocates
For Respondents : Ms. Honey Satpal, Advocate for R.P. Ms. Misha and Ms. Jasveen Kaur, Advocates for 'CoC'
ORDER
03.10.2018 This appeal has been preferred by IFCI Limited who claim to
be a 'Financial Creditor' against the order dated 25th July, 2018 passed by the
Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal), Chandigarh Bench,
Chandigarh in C.A. Nos. 61/2018, 77/2018, 177/2017, 178/2018 & 72/2018
IN CP(IB) No. 42/Chd/Hry/2017 whereby and whereunder the claim of the
appellant being 'Financial Creditor' on the basis of 'letter of Comfort' has been
rejected.
2. It is not in dispute that the impugned order dated 25th July, 2018 was
communicated by the 'Resolution Professional' to the appellant on 26th July,
2018 but the appeal was not filed within the prescribed period of limitation. As
this Appellate Tribunal has no jurisdiction to condone the delay beyond fifteen -2-
days apart from thirty days period prescribed for filing the appeal in terms of
sub-section (2) of Section 61 of the I&B Code, the prayer of condonation of delay
is rejected.
3. In view of the rejection of the application for condonation of delay, the
appeal is also not maintainable. However, learned Senior Counsel appearing on
behalf of the appellant submits that against the same very impugned order,
another 'Financial Creditor - Central Bank of India' has already moved before
this Appellate Tribunal, which is likely to be listed on 4th October, 2018.
4. In this regard, we give liberty to the appellant to assist this Appellate
Tribunal in other Appeal in which the same very impugned order dated 25th July,
2018 is under challenge.
5. The appeal is dismissed being barred by limitation but with the aforesaid
liberty.
[Justice S.J. Mukhopadhaya] Chairperson
[ Justice Bansi Lal Bhat ] Member (Judicial)
/ns/gc/
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 614 of 2018
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