Miss Lucy
← All judgments

Prayag Polytech Private Limited vs Sivalik Enterprises Private Limited

National Company Law Appellate Tribunal2 August 2019

Ratio decidendi

The rule this decision rests on

Under the proviso to sub-section (2) of Section 61 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, the Appellate Tribunal has no jurisdiction to condone a delay in filing an appeal beyond the further period of 15 days (a total of 45 days) allowed on top of the initial 30-day period; where the appeal is filed after a delay exceeding that statutory limit, the appeal is barred by limitation and must be dismissed without examining its merits.

Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.

Judgment

As delivered

NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHICompany Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 785 of 2019IN THE MATTER OF:

Prayag Polytech Private Limited .... Appellant

Vs

Sivalik Enterprises Private Limited .... Respondent

Present: For Appellant: Mr. Vipul Ganda and Ms. Shreya Jain, Advocates.

For Respondent:

ORDER

02.08.2019 The Appellant has preferred this Appeal against the order

passed by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal),

Bench-III, New Delhi, whereby, application under Section 7 of the Insolvency

and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (in short 'I&B Code') preferred by the Appellant

was dismissed with cost of Rs.1 lakh.

2. Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Appellant argued on merits

to suggest that the Appellant is a 'Financial Creditor' and there was a debt

payable, which the 'Corporate Debtor' defaulted.

3. However, from the record we find that the Appeal has been preferred

after delay of 52 days and in view of the proviso to sub-section (2) of Section

61 of the I&B Code, this Appellate Tribunal has no jurisdiction to condone

the delay of more than 52 days after the expiry of the period of 30 days for

filing an Appeal.

Page 1 of 2

4. For the reason aforesaid, we are not expressing any opinion on the

merits of the Appeal and the Appeal is dismissed being barred by limitation.

[Justice S. J. Mukhopadhaya] Chairperson

[Justice A.I.S. Cheema] Member (Judicial)

[KanthiNarahari] Member (Technical)

Ash/GC Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 785 of 2019 Page 2 of 2

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