Kailash Chand Sharma vs Arun Kumar Gupta & Ors
- CitationCompany Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1160 of 2025
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The Tribunal's jurisdiction to condone delay in filing an appeal under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code is limited to a period of 15 days beyond the prescribed limitation period, and no further extension may be granted. An appeal filed beyond that 15-day condonable window, here a delay of 36 days, cannot be saved by an application for condonation of delay, which must be rejected together with the memo of appeal.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
IN THE MATTER OF: Kailash Chand Sharma ...Appellant Versus Arun Kumar Gupta & Ors. ...Respondents
Present: For Appellant : Mr. Gaurav Yadava, Advocate.
For Respondents : Mr. Shashwat Anand and Mr. Rishabh Kumar, Advocate for R-1/RP.
ORDER
(Hybrid Mode)
25.09.2025 : I.A. No. 4540/2025
1. This is an application praying for condonation of 36 days delay in filing
of the appeal.
2. The order impugned was passed on 24.03.2025 and this appeal has
been e-filed on 28.05.2025 with delay of 36 days.
3. Learned counsel for the parties have referred to the judgment of this
Tribunal dated 08.07.2025 in the matter of 'Directorate of Enforcement' Vs.
'Anil Kumar Mittal, Resolution Professional of Varutha Developers Pvt.
Ltd. & Ors.' in [I.A. No. 2327/2025 in Comp. App. (AT) (Ins.) No.
605/2025], where this Tribunal has held that jurisdiction to condone the
delay of this Tribunal is limited to 15 days.
4. Learned counsel for the respondent relies on the said judgment which
is fully applicable in the facts of the present case.
5. In the present case, there is a delay of 36 days which is beyond the
condonable period hence the delay condonation application is rejected. Memo
of appeal is also rejected.
[Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson
[Barun Mitra] Member (Technical) himanshu/nn
Comp. App. (AT) (Ins.) No. 1160 of 2025 & I.A. No. 4494 & 4540 of 2025 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