Naresh Kumar vs Durgesh Kumar Sharma & Ors
- CitationCompany Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No.901 of 2024
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The appellate jurisdiction of the Tribunal to condone delay in filing an appeal under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code is confined by the statute: where an appeal is filed beyond the prescribed period of thirty days, the Tribunal may condone a further delay only up to fifteen days, and it has no power to condone delay beyond that limit. An appeal filed outside the statutory extended period, here by 888 days, cannot be entertained, and the delay condonation application and the memorandum of appeal are liable to be dismissed and rejected accordingly. A party's plea that it was not a party to the underlying proceeding, or that it came to know of the insolvency process late, does not enlarge the Tribunal's statutory power to condone delay beyond the fifteen-day limit.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
Naresh Kumar Through POA Holder Sukhbhir Singh ...Appellant
Versus
Durgesh Kumar Sharma & Ors. ...Respondents
Present: For Appellant : Mr. Mohit D. Ram, Mr. Anubhav Sharma, Mr. Ashutosh Bhatia, Advocates. For Respondents :
ORDER
(Hybrid Mode)
14.05.2024: This Appeal has been filed against the order dated
12.10.2021. Appeal has been e-filed on 17.04.2024 and in the Delay
Condonation Application, the Appellant has prayed for condonation of 888
days' delay in filing the appeal. Learned counsel for the Appellant submits
that the Appellant was not party to the proceeding, hence, delay was
occasioned.
2. Our jurisdiction to condone delay is limited to 15 days after expiry of
period of 30 days as per Section 61(2) proviso. Delay of 888 days' in filing the
appeal cannot be condoned.
3. Learned counsel for the Appellant submits that Appellant is third party
and he can only file appeal when he came to know about the CIRP. We are
unable to accept the explanation for condonation of inordinate delay.
Cont'd.../ -2-
4. Delay Condonation Application is dismissed. In result, Memo of Appeal
is also rejected.
[Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson
[Barun Mitra] Member (Technical
[Arun Baroka] Member (Technical) Archana/nn
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No.901 of 2024
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