M K Overseas Export Pvt Ltd vs Mr. Sapan Mohan Garg
- CitationCompany Appeal (AT) (Ins.) No.1040 of 2023
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
Where an appeal under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code is to be filed within 45 days of the order, the limitation period runs from the date the order is pronounced, not from the date the appellant learns of it. The Appellate Tribunal's power to condone delay in filing such an appeal is confined to a further period of 15 days beyond the statutory limit, and it has no jurisdiction to condone a longer delay. A general summer vacation of the court does not excuse the late filing of an appeal, since the Registry's notification permits filing during the vacation and the court sits to hear urgent matters.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
IN THE MATTER OF: M K Overseas Export Pvt. Ltd. ...Appellant
Versus
Sapan Mohan Garg Resolution Professional of M K Overseas Pvt. Ltd. ...Respondent
Present: For Appellant: Mr. Kumar Mihir, Mr. Rakesh Kumar, Mr. Ankit Sharma, Advocates. For Respondent:
ORDER
22.09.2023: I.A. No. 3560 of 2023: Heard Learned Counsel for the
applicant. This is an application praying for condonation of 29 days delay in
filing the Appeal. The order was pronounced by Adjudicating Authority on
27.04.2023 and appeal was e-filed on 24.06.2023. In paragraph 3 of the
application, the applicant has given basis on which exemption is sought for
which is to the following effect:
"That the impugned order is passed on 27.04.2023, and the
appeal was to be filed within a period of 45 days thereof i.e. by
11.06.2023. However, due to the summer vacation, the Appellant
was able to filed the instant appeal on 24.06.2023 with a delay of
29 days which were neither deliberate nor intentional and
therefore, is filing the instant application seeking condonation of
delay in filing the instant appeal."
Cont'd.../ -2-
2. Learned Counsel for the applicant submits that appellant came to know
about the order only on 12.05.2023, hence, the limitation shall starts from the
date when appellant came to know about the order.
3. We have considered submissions of the counsel for the applicant and perused the record.
4. Orders having pronounced on 27.04.2023 the period of limitation shall be commenced from the date of pronouncement as has been laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in "V. Nagarajan" case.
5. In so far as the submission of the applicant that there was summer vacation, therefore, appeal could not be filed. There is already notification issued by the Registry that filing of the appeal is not precluded during summer vacation and Court also use to convene twice in a week to consider urgent matters. Therefore that submission has also no legs to stand.
6. The appeal having been filed beyond 15 days after expiry of limitation.
Our jurisdiction to condone delay is limited to only 15 days as per Section 61(2)
proviso. We are unable to condone 29 days delay in filing the Appeal. Delay
Condonation Application is dismissed. In result, Memo of Appeal is rejected.
[Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson
[Mr. Barun Mitra] Member (Technical)
[Mr. Arun Baroka] Member (Technical)
sa/nn
Company Appeal (AT) (Ins.) No.1040 of 2023
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