Nashik Workers Union vs Mr. Dhaval Jitendrakumar Mistry ...
- CitationCompany Appeal (AT) (Ins) No. 111 of 2026
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The limitation period for an appeal under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code runs from the date the impugned order is pronounced or delivered, not from the later date on which a non-party appellant received a copy or learned of the order; the day of delivery is excluded and counting begins the following day. The benefit under the Limitation Act of extending the period when the last day falls on a day the court is closed applies only to the 30-day prescribed period, and does not extend the outer condonable limit beyond the 15-day extension permitted under the proviso to Section 61(2) of the Code; an appeal filed after the expiry of the 45-day outer limit, where the delay exceeds that 15-day condonable period, cannot be admitted and the delay cannot be condoned.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
IN THE MATTER OF: Nashik Workers Union ...Appellants Versus Dhaval Jitendra Kumar Mistry, ...Respondents Resolution professional & Ors.
Present: For Appellant : Ms. Sudha Bhardwaj, Advocate. For Respondents : Mr. Atul Sharma and Ms. Aditi Sharma, Advocates for R1/RP.
ORDER
(Hybrid Mode)
17.03.2026: I.A. No. 398/2026
This is an application praying for condonation of 16 days delay in filing
the appeal. The order impugned was passed on 16.10.2025 and the appeal
has been e-filed on 01.12.2025. Ld. Counsel for the appellant submits that
appellants were not party to the proceedings and they have filed only claim as
worker and they came to know about the order by email dated 03.11.2025
hence the limitation for the appellant shall commence when the receipt the
information of the order on 03.11.2025 that to without the copy of the
resolution plan.
Ld. Counsel for the respondent opposing the submission submits that
limitation for filing the appeal shall commence on immediately on the date
when order was delivered and appeal having been filed on 46th day is beyond
condonable period. The submission of the appellant that appellant came to know about the order only on 03.11.2025 when it was communicated hence
limitation should commence and counted from 03.11.2025 cannot be
accepted. It is settled law that when the order is delivered limitation
commences and limitation shall be counted from the next day. Ld. Counsel
for the appellant lastly contended that 45th day being Sunday the appeal can
be filed on 46th day. The said issue is also settled that the period benefit of the
'Limitation Act' on the day when the court is closed is available only for the
period prescribed for the limitation that is for 30 days. That the said benefit
cannot be held applicable with regard to 45th day as contended by the
appellant. Our jurisdiction of condone the delay is limited to 15 days as per
Section 61(2) proviso. The delay being beyond our jurisdiction and
condonable period cannot be condoned. Delay condonation application is
rejected consequently memo of appeal is also rejected.
[Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson
[Barun Mitra] Member (Technical) harleen/MD
2 of 2 Company Appeal (AT) (Ins) No. 111 of 2026
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