Vineet Gupta vs Sanjay Kumar Singh & Ors
- CitationCompany Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 667 of 2024
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
Where an appeal under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code is filed beyond the period of limitation, the Appellate Tribunal's power to condone delay is confined by the statute to a further period of fifteen days after the expiry of the limitation period, and the Tribunal cannot condone delay beyond that outer limit. Pendency of a writ petition before the High Court, and the appellant's absence abroad, do not extend or suspend the limitation period so as to bring a later filing within the Tribunal's power to condone delay, where the appeal is still filed more than fifteen days beyond the limitation period as computed from the High Court's dismissal of that writ petition.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
IN THE MATTER OF: Vineet Gupta ...Appellant Versus Sanjay Kumar Singh & Ors. ...Respondents
Present: For Appellant : Mr. Kushagra Bansal, Advocate. For Respondents :
ORDER
(Hybrid Mode)
22.04.2024 : I.A. No. 2400 of 2024
1. This is an application praying for condonation of delay of 292 days in
filing the Appeal. The order impugned was passed on 22.02.2023 in I.A. filed
by the Appellant against which order, Appellant claimed to have filed the Writ
Petition being W.P. (C) No. 13819/2023 before the High Court of Delhi which
was dismissed on 18.10.2023.
2. Learned Counsel for the Appellant submits that since the Writ Petition
was filed and thereafter Appellant was out of Country the delay had occurred.
3. Even we take the Order of the High Court of Delhi dated 18.10.2023,
this Appeal filed on 10.01.2024 is beyond 45 days from 18.10.2023 itself. Our
jurisdiction to condone the delay is limited to 15 days as per Section 61 sub-
Section (2) proviso.
4. We thus are unable to condone the delay which is admittedly beyond
15 days after expiry of limitation.
Delay condonation is rejected. Memo of Appeal is also rejected.
[Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson
[Arun Baroka] Member (Technical) himanshu/nn
Comp. App. (AT) (Ins.) No. 667 of 2024 & I.A. No. 2190, 2400 of 2024 2 of 2
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