M/S.Square1 Packaging & Polymers vs Matoshri Laxmi Sugar Co-Generation ...
- CitationCompany Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 363 of 2023
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
Limitation for filing an appeal runs from the date on which the impugned order is pronounced, and not from the date on which it is uploaded or otherwise made available, where the appellant's counsel was present when the order was passed. Non-uploading of the order and the absence of partners on travel do not constitute sufficient cause for condoning a delay in filing an appeal where the appellate jurisdiction to condone delay is limited to a fixed period, and the appeal is therefore rejected where the delay exceeds that period.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
Square 1Packaging & Polymers ...Appellant
Versus
Matoshri Laxmi Sugar Co-Generation Industries Ltd. ...Respondent
Present: For Appellant: Mr. Pritesh Burad, Ms. Samita Vaviya, Advocates For Respondent: Mr. Shivalok Y, Manisha K., T.N.D. Prasad, Prakasa, Advocates
ORDER
25.04.2023: I.A. No. 1215 of 2023. This is an Application praying for
condonation of 40 days delay in filing the Appeal. This Appeal has been filed
against the Order dated 01.12.2022 passed by the Adjudicating Authority by
which Company Petition filed by the Appellant was dismissed.
2. This Appeal has been e-filed on 09.02.2023. There is delay of 40 days in
filing the Appeal. The prayer made in the Application is to condone 40 days
delay. Our jurisdiction to condone the delay is 15 days only. Learned Counsel
for the Appellant submits that order was not uploaded hence delay has
occasioned. He further submits that partners were travelling.
3. We are of the view that limitation to file Appeal commences from the
date when the Order is pronounced especially when the Learned Counsel for
the Appellant was present when the Order was passed. -2-
4. We thus are of the view that there is no ground to condone the delay.
Delay Condonation Application (I.A. No. 1215 of 2023) is dismissed.
Consequently, the Memo of Appeal is rejected.
[Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson
[Mr. Barun Mitra] Member (Technical)
Basant/nn
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 363/2023
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