Vaneet Ahuja vs Duncans Industries Limited
- CitationInterlocutory Application No.2365/2022
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The Tribunal may condone a delay in re-filing a memo of appeal after office defects are cured where the appellant shows sufficient cause, here the illness of the appellant's counsel during the period allowed for curing defects, and may direct that the matter be listed for admission as a fresh case.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
Vaneet Ahuja .... Appellant
Versus
Duncans Industries Limited (Through Mr. Ram Ratan Modi, Resolution Professional) .... Respondent
Appearance: Chaitanya Bansal, Advocate for the Appellant.
25.07.2022
This hearing has been held through video conferencing.
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 31.05.2022 and the Office after scrutiny of the Memo of Appeal on 16.06.2022, intimated the defects to the Appellant on the same day and returned the Memo of Appeal to the Appellant on 22.06.2022. The Appellant re-filed the Memo of Appeal on 15.07.2022. It is stated in the Interlocutory Application (IA) that as the counsel for the Appellant was suffering from Typhoid and Covid-19 infection, the defects could not be removed within the specified time. Hence, there is delay of 12 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