Home Case Index All Cases Insolvency and Bankruptcy Insolvency and Bankruptcy + AT Insolvency and Bankruptcy - 2023 (4) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (4) TMI 776 - AT - Insolvency and BankruptcyCondonation of delay of 14 days in filing appeal - Direction for reversal of the transaction in favour of the Corporate Debtor - Section 43 of I&B Code - proceeding before the Adjudicating Authority against the Respondent No.2 proceeded ex-parte since despite serving notice, Respondent No.2 (Appellant herein) did not appear - HELD THAT:- The judgment of V. Nagarajan vs. SKS Ispat and Power Limited & Ors. [[2021 (10) TMI 941 - SUPREME COURT]] has considered provisions of Section 61 of the I&B Code providing for period of limitation for filing the appeal. The Hon’ble Supreme Court while noticing the Section 61 has also noted the provisions of Section 421 of Companies Act, 2013 which provides for limitation for filing appeal. Hon’ble Supreme Court has noticed the legislative change under Section 61 and has held that change in the scheme of Section 61 is a notable difference and the absence of the words “from the date on which a copy of the order of the Tribunal is made available to the person aggrieved” has significance - The Hon’ble Supreme Court, thus, has clearly held that running of the limitation shall start from the date of pronouncement of the order and it is not dependent on the communication of the order to aggrieved person. The Appellant did not appear before the Adjudicating Authority despite service of notice, hence, it will be treated that it was served and the Appellant could not be heard in saying that the order dated 22.12.2022 is exparte and limitation to file appeal shall only begin when he has knowledge of the order. This submission of the Appellant cannot be accepted. It is further observed that even the ground taken in the delay condonation application that Appellant came to know about the order when he received letter of the Liquidator on 08.01.2023 is unfounded and not supported by any material. Whereas the Liquidator in his reply has brought material on record which indicate that order was sent by Liquidator on 04.01.2023 by email to the Appellant. Thus, even if, for argument sake only, if limitation is calculated from date of receipt of email, then also the Appeal filed was beyond 15 days after expiry of limitation. There are no ground to allow the delay condonation application. The delay condonation application is dismissed.
|