2023 (3) TMI 1281 - AT - Insolvency and Bankruptcy

Condonation of delay for four days in filing of the appeal - Appellant was in jail and was not keeping well and admitted in the jail hospital - Sufficient cause for delay or not - whether the delay caused in filing of the appeal much beyond the period of 45 days can be condoned by this Tribunal? - HELD THAT - Section 61(1) provides for a right of appeal to an aggrieved person. Section 61(2) provides a period of limitation 30 days for preferring an appeal in terms of Section 61(1) before the Appellate Authority. Section 61(2) proviso provides another period of 15 days which can be extended in case the Appellant satisfies the Appellate Authority about the existence of a sufficient cause for not filing the appeal in time. There is no further provision in the Code for looking into the aspect of condonation of delay beyond the period of 15 days much less 45 days. In the case of NATIONAL SPOT EXCHANGE LIMITED VERSUS MR. ANIL KOHLI RESOLUTION PROFESSIONAL FOR DUNAR FOODS LIMITED 2021 (9) TMI 1156 - SUPREME COURT the Hon ble Supreme Court has held that considering the statutory provisions which provide that delay beyond 15 days in preferring the appeal is uncondonable the same cannot be condoned even in exercise of powers under Article 142 of the Constitution. Thus it is clear that there is no scope for condonation of delay beyond the period of 15 days much less 45 days as there is no window available for this Tribunal to exercise its jurisdiction for condonation of delay - application dismissed.

Summary

Issues Involved:
The issue in this case is whether the delay caused in filing the appeal much beyond the period of 45 days can be condoned by the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal.

Details of the Judgment:

Delay in Filing Appeal:
The appeal was filed after a delay of 45 days from the date of the impugned order, with the Appellant claiming that the delay was due to not receiving the certified copy of the order while being in jail. The Resolution Professional (RP) argued that the period of limitation should be counted from the date of the order, not from the date of knowledge, citing legal precedents. The Tribunal examined Section 61 of the Code, which provides a limitation of 30 days for filing an appeal, extendable by 15 days for sufficient cause. However, there is no provision for condonation of delay beyond 15 days, let alone 45 days.

Legal Precedents:
Referring to the case of V. Nagarajan, the Supreme Court emphasized the importance of timely filing of appeals under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC), highlighting the need for due diligence and prompt action by aggrieved parties. The Court held that the limitation period for IBC proceedings should not be extended based on the receipt of a certified copy of the order. Additionally, in the case of National Spot Exchange Limited, the Supreme Court reiterated that delays beyond 15 days in filing appeals are not condonable, even under Article 142 of the Constitution.

Conclusion:
Based on the legal provisions and precedents cited, the Tribunal concluded that there is no scope for condonation of delay beyond 15 days, especially not for a delay of 45 days. As such, the application for condonation of delay was dismissed, and consequently, the appeal was also dismissed, with no costs awarded.

This summary provides a detailed overview of the judgment, focusing on the key issue of condonation of delay in filing the appeal beyond the specified timeframe.