Sachin Anand vs Kgk Realty (India) Private Limited
- CitationCompany Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 581 of 2024
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The Tribunal's power to condone delay in filing an appeal under Section 61(2) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 is limited to a further period of 15 days beyond the statutory limit, and it has no jurisdiction to condone delay beyond that period.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
IN THE MATTER OF: Sachin Anand ...Appellant Versus KGK Realty (India) Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. ...Respondents
Present: For Appellant : Mr. Chandra Bhushan Prasad, Mr. Amalok Naryan and Mr. Krishna Raj, Advocates. For Respondents : Mr. Ajay Bhargava, Ms. Wamika Trehan, Ms. Raddhika K. Tandon and Mr. Siddhant Kumar, Advocates.
ORDER
(Hybrid Mode)
09.04.2024 : I.A. No. 2058 of 2024
This is an application praying for condonation of delay in filing the
Appeal. Order impugned was passed on 24.04.2023 and the Appeal was e-
filed on 07.01.2024.
2. Counsel for the Appellant submits that Appellant was not aware of the
CIRP hence he could not file the claim. Counsel for the Respondent submits
that similar issue with regard to same CIRP by Appellants who had filed the
delay condonation application has been considered by detailed judgment of
this Tribunal in `Sumit Singh Basisth' Vs. `Sare Gurugram Pvt. Ltd.', I.A.
808/2024 in Comp. App. (AT) (Ins.) No. 138 of 2024 passed on 22.03.2024
in which the application of delay condonation was rejected.
3. The present case is fully covered by Judgment in `Sumit Singh
Basisth's' case.
4. We are of the view that the delay in filing the Appeal is beyond
condonable period and our jurisdiction to condone the delay is only 15 days
under Section 61 sub-Section (2) proviso.
Delay condonation application is rejected. Memo of Appeal is also
rejected.
[Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson
[Barun Mitra] Member (Technical)
[Arun Baroka] Member (Technical) himanshu/nn
Comp. App. (AT) (Ins.) No. 581 of 2024 & I.A. No. 2058 of 2024 2 of 2
Connected matters
Decided by the same order
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