Vaishali Bharat Khara & Ors vs Mr. Premraj Ramratan Laddha & Ors
- CitationCompany Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 987 of 2023
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The period within which an appeal against an order of the Adjudicating Authority under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code must be filed may be extended by the Appellate Tribunal only to the extent of the statutory maximum extension of fifteen days beyond the prescribed limitation period; the Tribunal has no power to condone a delay exceeding that outer limit, and where the delay is 174 days the application for condonation must be dismissed and the appeal rejected as time-barred.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
Vaishali Bharat Khara & Ors. ...Appellant
Versus
Premraj Ramratan Laddha & Ors. ...Respondents
Present: For Appellant: Mr. Jay Prakash Somani, Mrs. Shobha Somani, Mr. Siddharth S. Chapal Gaonkar, Mr. Manoj Kumar C., Ms. Shisba Chawla, Mr. Nishant Verma, Mr. Rajnish Kumar, Advocates For Respondent: Mr. Atul Sharma, Mr. Shivanshu Kumar, Advocates for R-1
ORDER
02.08.2023: This is an Application bearing I.A. No. 3367 of 2023 filed
for condonation of delay in filing the Appeal.
2. The Order impugned was passed on 21st December, 2022 and the
Appeal has been e-filed on 13th July, 2023 with delay of 174 days.
3. Learned Counsel for the Appellant submits that Appellant was not part
of the proceeding and was not aware of the Order. Order has been passed by
the Adjudicating Authority for liquidation on an Application filed by the
Resolution Professional. The Order of Liquidation could have been challenged
within the limitation as prescribed under Section 61 of the Code. Our -2-
jurisdiction to condone the delay is of 15 days only and we thus are unable to
condone the delay of 174 days in filing the Appeal.
4. Delay Condonation Application is dismissed. Memo of Appeal is rejected.
[Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson
[Mr. Barun Mitra] Member (Technical)
Basant/nn
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 987/2023
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