Krishan Kumar vs Vikram Bajaj Resolution Professional ...
- CitationComp. App. (AT) (Ins) No. 1589 of 2024
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The limitation for an appeal under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code runs from the date on which the order is pronounced, not from the date on which the appellant obtains a certified copy of the order or otherwise learns of it. The Appellate Tribunal's power to condone delay in filing an appeal under Section 61 is confined by the proviso to Section 61(2), which permits condonation only up to a maximum of fifteen days beyond the prescribed period; where the delay exceeds that outer limit, the Tribunal has no jurisdiction to condone it, and the application for condonation must be dismissed and the appeal rejected.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
IN THE MATTER OF: Krishan Kumar ...Appellants Versus Vikram Bajaj ...Respondents Resolution Professional, AMR Infrastructures Ltd.
Present: For Appellant : Mr. Rohit Nain, Advocate. For Respondents : Mr. Abhishek Anand, Mr. Karan Kohli, Ms. Ridhima Mehrotra and Ms. Palak Kalra, Advocates.
ORDER
(Hybrid Mode)
28.08.2024: I.A. No. 5784 of 2024
This is an application praying for condonation of 81 days' delay in filing
the appeal. The order was pronounced on 09.04.2024 in this appeal has been
e-filed on 29.07.2024. Counsel for the appellant submits that appellant was
not aware of the order and on advice of legal consultant they applied for
certified copy of entire order sheets on 27.06.2024 and thereafter when the
copy was given they came to know about the order 19.04.2024. The order has
been pronounced on 09.04.2024.
The limitation shall commence from the date of pronouncement. There is
delay of 81 days our jurisdiction to condone the delay is limited to 15 days as
per Section 61(2) proviso. The delay being beyond condonable period cannot be condoned. Delay condonation application is dismissed; memo of appeal is
rejected.
[Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson
[Barun Mitra] Member (Technical)
[Arun Baroka] Member (Technical) harleen/NN
Comp. App. (AT) (Ins) No. 1589 of 2024 & I.A. No. 5784 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