Miss Lucy
← All judgments

Vikas Scaffolding Private Limited vs Bil Infratech Limited

National Company Law Appellate Tribunal17 January 2024

Ratio decidendi

The rule this decision rests on

The Tribunal may condone a delay in re-filing a memo of appeal after office-report defects where the appellant's reasons, as set out in the interlocutory application, are found sufficient.

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.326 of 2024Un-numbered Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No.___/2024(F.No.20.12.2023/NCLAT/UR/10142)In the matter of:

Vikas Scaffolding Pvt. Ltd. .... Appellant Vs. Subodh Kumar Agarwal (Liquidator of BIL Infratech Ltd.) .... Respondent

Appearance: Pranav Khanna, Advocate for the Appellant.

17th 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 08.12.2023. The Office after scrutiny of the Memo of Appeal on 20.12.2023, intimated the defects to the Appellant on the same day. The Appellant re-filed the Memo of Appeal on 10.01.2024. It is stated in the Interlocutory Application (IA) that the Appellant is a business entity, the authorised representative had to rush for prior business commitments and was travelling out of station, the counsel for the Appellant was unable to tap upon the Appellant for further progress in the matter. The documents were voluminous and scattered in nature, the Appellant took time to chunk out the information and the documents, which could be corroborated later at the time of the refiling of the appeal. Hence, there is delay of 14 days in refiling 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