Simbhaoli Sugars Limited vs Mr. Pramod Kumar Sharma Resolution ...
- CitationInterlocutory Application No.2535/2023
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The Tribunal condones a six-day delay in re-filing a memorandum of appeal, holding that the illness of the appellant's advocate, which left the office staff unaware of the defect objections, is a sufficient reason for the delay, and directs that the appeal be listed for admission as a fresh case.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
Simbhaoli Sugars Ltd. .... Appellant
Vs.
Pramod Kumar Sharma, Resolution Professional of Uniworld Sugars Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. .... Respondents
Appearance: Rachit Batra, Advocate for the Appellant.
2nd June, 2023
This is an application to extend the time granted for curing the defects.
2. The facts of the case are that the Appellant filed the Memo of Appeal on 04.05.2023 and the Office after scrutiny of the Memo of Appeal on 12.05.2023, intimated the defects to the Appellant on the same day and returned the Memo of Appeal to the Appellant on 19.05.2023. The Appellant re-filed the Memo of Appeal on 25.05.2023. It is stated in the Interlocutory Application (IA) that Appellant's Advocate fell seriously ill, hence was unable to come across the objection, which were provided to the office staff of Advocate on 12.05.2023. Moreover, no one else in the office was aware of the pendency of the objection. Hence, there is delay of 06 days in re-filing the Memo of Appeal, so the same may be condoned.
3. Heard learned Counsel appearing for the Appellant and perused the averments made in the IA as well as Office report.
4. Considering the submissions made on behalf of the Appellant and for the reasons mentioned in the IA, which are sufficient, the delay in re- filing the Memo of Appeal is hereby condoned.
5. As prayed, list the case before the Hon'ble Bench under the heading 'for admission (fresh case)'.
6. With the aforesaid order, this IA stands disposed of.
(Peeush Pandey) Registrar
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