Home Case Index All Cases Insolvency and Bankruptcy Insolvency and Bankruptcy + AT Insolvency and Bankruptcy - 2021 (10) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2021 (10) TMI 1083 - AT - Insolvency and BankruptcyCondonation of delay of 52 days in filing the Appeal - Approval of Resolution Plan - Section 31 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 - HELD THAT:- Admittedly this Appeal has been filed against the impugned order dated 22 October 2019, and the Appeal was filed on 29 January 2020 with an Application for condonation of delay of 52 days. The present Appeal has been filed 98 days after passing the impugned order, i.e., a delay of 68 days, beyond 30 days, prescribed under Section 61 (2) of the IBC - that in fact, it is an admitted case of the Appellant that the present Appeal has been filed with the delay of 52 days and thus, the Appellant itself has duly admitted that the Appeal is beyond the condonable period of Limitation under Section 61 (2) of the I&B Code. Admittedly the present Appeal has been filed against the impugned order dated 22 October 2019. Thus, the preposterous averments of the Appellant seeking to justify the delay in filing the Appeal do not render the present Appeal to be within Limitation. Accordingly, the present Appeals suffers from delay beyond the condonable period of 15 days under the proviso of Section 61 (2) of the IB code, hence liable to be dismissed at the threshold. The instant Appeal has been filed against the impugned order dated 22 October 2019, presented on 29 January 2020. Therefore, at the least, this Appeal is filed 98 days after passing of the impugned order, i.e. with a delay of 68 is beyond 30 days prescribed under Section 61 (2) of the IBC Code. Considering the statutory provision of Section 61 (2) of the IBC, this Appellate Tribunal has no power to condone the delay beyond 15 days after the prescribed 30 days provided for filing an Appeal. Therefore, the contention of the Appellant that the period from passing of the impugned order dated 22 October 2019 to the order dated 19 December 2019 should be considered a continuous cause of action is without any basis and not sustainable. Application rejected.
|