Miss Lucy
← All judgments

Uti Employees Sai Samruddhi ... vs Jayesh Sangharajka (Rp - Ornate Spaces ...

National Company Law Appellate Tribunal5 January 2024

Ratio decidendi

The rule this decision rests on

The delay in re-filing a defective memorandum of appeal may be condoned where the reasons advanced in the interlocutory application (counsel's travel during the festival vacation, the time taken to sort annexures, and the authorised signatory residing outside Delhi) are found sufficient, and the matter is then listed for admission as a fresh case.

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

Judgment

As delivered

THE NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNALPRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHIInterlocutory Application No.99/2024Un-numbered Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No.___/2024(F.No.17.11.2023/NCLAT/UR/09131)In the matter of:

UTI Employees Sai Samruddhi Co-operative Housing Society .... Appellant

Vs.

Jayesh Sangharajka (RP-Ornate Spaces Pvt. Ltd.) .... Respondent

Appearance: Nicky Pokar, Advocate for the Appellant.

5th January, 2024 (Virtual Mode)

This is an application to extend the time granted for curing the defects.

2. The facts of the case are that the Appellant e-filed the Memo of Appeal on 05.11.2023. The Office after scrutiny of the Memo of Appeal on 17.11.2023, intimated the defects to the Appellant on the same day. The Appellant re-filed the Memo of Appeal on 23.12.2023. It is stated in the Interlocutory Application (IA) that Counsel for the Appellant was travelling during the Diwali vacations and in the meanwhile, Appellant took some time in sorting the annexures and the authorised signatory of the Appellant resides outside Delhi and hence there is delay of 33 days in refiling the Memo of Appeal, so the same may be condoned. However, as per the Report of the Registry, the delay is of 29 days.

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