Jain Trading Co vs S R Industries
- CitationCompany Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 2099 of 2024
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The limitation period for filing an appeal runs from the date on which the impugned order is pronounced, and not from the date on which the appellant receives a copy of that order; receipt of a free copy is therefore not relevant to computing limitation. Where the appeal is filed beyond the period permitted for condonation of delay, the Tribunal has no jurisdiction to condone the delay, and the delay condonation application and the appeal must be rejected.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
IN THE MATTER OF: Jain Trading Co. ...Appellant
Versus
S.R. Industries Ltd. Through RP ...Respondent
Present: For Appellant : Mr. Kewal Krishan Saini, Advocate
For Respondent : Mr. Abhishek Anand, Mr. Karan Kohli and Ms. Palak Kalra, Advocates.
ORDER
(Hybrid Mode)
10.12.2024 I.A. No. 7708 of 2024 This is an application praying for
condonation of 40 days delay in re-filing the Appeal.
Sufficient cause has been shown in paragraph 4 of the delay
condonation application. Cause shown sufficient, delay is condoned.
I.A. No. 7822 of 2024 This is an application praying for condonation
of delay in filing the Appeal.
Learned Counsel for the Appellant submits that the delay is only two
days which submission has been opposed by Counsel for the Respondent. The
order impugned was passed on 01.07.2024 and this appeal has been e-filed
on 13.09.2024.
Learned Counsel for the Appellant submits that he has received the
copy only on 12.08.2024, hence the limitation should commence from
12.08.2024 and from 12.08.2024 delay is only two days.
Learned Counsel for the Respondent submits that order was delivered
on 01.07.2024 which was shown in the cause list at Item No. 4 and limitation
shall began from the delivery of the order.
The Hon'ble Supreme Court in judgment of the V. Nagarajan vs. SKS
Ispat and Power Ltd. & Ors. (Civil Appeal No. 3327 of 2020) has already
laid down the law, that the limitation for filing appeal shall commence from
the date when order is pronounced. The fact that free of cost copy was received
by the Appellant on 12.08.2024 is not relevant for purposes of limitation.
Counsel for the Appellant cannot claim start of the limitation from date, when
he received the copy. The said submission has already been rejected by
Hon'ble Supreme Court in V. Nagarajan's case.
We thus, are of the view that the delay in filing the appeal is beyond 15
days, which is beyond our jurisdiction to condone the delay which is limited
to 15 days only. The delay condonation application is rejected. The Memo of
Appeal is also rejected.
[Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson
[Barun Mitra] Member (Technical)
[Arun Baroka] Member (Technical) pks/nn
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 2099 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