Pioneer Packaging Industries Private ... vs Abhisek Gupta

Comp. App. (AT) (Ins) No. 277 of 2025 & I.A. No. 1056, 1057, 1058, 1059 of 2025 IN THE MATTER OF: Pioneer Packaging Industries Pvt. Ltd. ...Appellant

Versus

Abhisek Gupta Resolution Professional of Indian Pulp ...Respondent and Paper Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. Present: For Appellant : Mr. Arik Banerjee, Vikas Baisya, Puja Chaurasia, Adv.

For Respondent : Mr. K. Datta, Sr. Adv. with Sailendra Tiwari, Palzer Moktan, Adv. for R2 Mr. Abhijeet Sinha, Saikat Sarkar, Adv. for R3 Ms. Swati Sinha, S. Ahmed, Adv. for R1

ORDER

14.02.2025: I.A No. 1056 of 2025: This application is filed for

condonation of delay of 17 days in filing the present appeal.

2. The Appellant has challenged the order dated 20.12.2024

by which an application filed by the Applicant/Appellant bearing

I.A No. 1450/KB/2023 in CP (IB) No. 2179/KB/2019 to direct the

RP to at least take into consideration the EOI submitted by the

Applicant/Appellant was dismissed.

3. The present appeal has been filed under Section 61 of the

Code which prescribes the period of 30 days for an aggrieved

person to challenge the order of the Tribunal. Since, the impugned

order was pronounced on 20.12.2024, therefore, the period of 2

limitation started from 21.12.2024 and 30 days had expired

on 19.01.2025 whereas the appeal has been e-filed on 05.02.2025.

4. Since, the appeal has been filed beyond the period of 30

days, therefore, the Appellant has filed the application for

condonation of delay of 17 days in filing the present appeal in

which he has made the following averments :-

3. That the order passed by the Tribunal on 20.12.2024, however, it is admittedly uploaded on server on 24.12.2024. Thus, the limitation period of 30 days for filing the present appeal as per Section 61(2) of the Code expired on 23.01.2025 but the present appeal is being filed on 05.02.2025 i.e. with a delay of 17 days which this Hon'ble Court had discretion to condone.

4. That the Appellant is based out in Kolkata and he took some time to arrange the documents and a counsel based out of Delhi for filing the present appeal, failing which Appellant appointed Kolkata based Adv.

for the same. Ld. Adv. of the Appellant herein was suffering from ill health and therefore could not append the signatures of the Appellant therein on the present appeal at relevant point of time and therefore, the appeal could not be filed within the statutory period.

5. The Appellant himself has made the prayer that "allow the

present application and condone the delay of 17 days in filing

the present appeal." But during the course of hearing, he has

submitted that since the order was uploaded on the server on

24.12.2024, therefore, the limitation has to be counted from the 3

said date and as such it was within the condonable period of 15

days.

6. We have heard Counsel for the Appellant and perused the

record.

7. There is no dispute that the Appellant has himself sought

condonation of delay of 17 days but during the course of

hearing, he has submitted that the period of 17 days had to

be mentioned by him on the insistence of the registry otherwise if

the period of limitation is counted from the date of uploading

on the server on 24.12.2024 then the Appellant shall have the

benefit of four days and hence the appeal would have been

within the condonable period of 15 days. This argument of the

Appellant cannot be accepted because the limitation has to be

counted from the date of the order and not from the date of

uploading the order. In this regard, reference may be had to the

decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of V.

Nagrajan Vs. SKS Ispat and Power Ltd. & Ors., Civil Appeal

No. 3327 of 2020.

8. Thus, in view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, since

the appeal has been filed beyond the period of 15 days,

therefore, in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court 4

in the case of National Spot Exchange Limited Vs. Anil Kohli

this Court does not have the jurisdiction to condone the delay.

9. Thus, the present appeal is clearly barred by limitation and

hence, the application is hereby dismissed and as a

consequence thereof, the appeal is also dismissed having not been

duly constituted.

[Justice Rakesh Kumar Jain] Member (Judicial)

[Mr. Naresh Salecha] Member (Technical)

[Mr. Arun Baroka] Member (Technical)

sheetal