M/S Luxture Surface Coating Pvt.Ltd vs M/S Dhanuka Reality Ltd
- CitationCompany Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1282 of 2023
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The Appellate Tribunal's jurisdiction to condone delay in filing an appeal under Section 61(2) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 is limited to a further period of fifteen days beyond the prescribed limitation period, and it has no power to condone a delay exceeding that maximum extension. Where the period of delay sought to be condoned exceeds the fifteen-day extension permitted by the statute, the Tribunal is without jurisdiction to condone it, and the application for condonation must be rejected, with the consequence that the appeal itself stands dismissed for being time-barred.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1282 of 2023 & I.A. No. 4542, 4461 of 2023
IN THE MATTER OF:
Luxture Surface Coatings Pvt. Ltd. ...Appellant
Versus
Dhanuka Realty Ltd. ...Respondents
Present: For Appellant: Mr. Tanveer Oberoi, Mr. Nikhil Yadav, Advocates For Respondent: Mr. Yash Tandon, Mr. Ankit Sareen, Advocates
ORDER
07.11.2023: I.A. No. 4461 of 2023. This is an application praying for condonation of delay of 32 days in refiling the Appeal.
2. Learned Counsel for the Appellant submits that certified copy of the Order was applied but sometime was taken in translation of the document from Hindi to English.
3. Cause shown sufficient. Refiling delay is condoned.
4. I.A. No. 4542 of 2023. This is an application praying for condonation of 23 days delay in filing the Appeal. Order impugned was passed on 01st June, 2023 and Appeal was e-filed on 01st August, 2023 with delay of 23 days.
5. Learned Counsel for the Appellant has relied on paragraph 4 of the Application where reasons have been given which is to the following effect:
"4. The appellant has received the certified copy of the impugned order dated 01.06.2023 on 09.07.2023 through speed post and it is further important to state that appellant being a private limited company with the directors travelling in various parts of rajasthan and India could not promptly act on the same for these personal reasons. The copy of the -2-
speed post receipt along-with tracking report is attached as Annexure-l."
6. Our jurisdiction to condone the delay is limited to 15 days only as per Section 61(2) proviso hence we are unable to condone the delay of 23 days. Delay Condonation Application is rejected. Consequently, the Memo of Appeal is dismissed.
[Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson
[Mr. Barun Mitra] Member (Technical)
[Mr. Arun Baroka] Member (Technical)
Basant/nn
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1282/2023
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