Home Case Index All Cases Insolvency and Bankruptcy Insolvency and Bankruptcy + SCH Insolvency and Bankruptcy - 2022 (7) TMI SCH This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (7) TMI 836 - SCH - Insolvency and BankruptcyPower of NCLT to condone the delay beyond 15 days - Condonation of Delay of 27 days in filing for restoration was admitted - restoration of petition under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 - time limitation - HELD THAT:- The orders of condonation of delay, restoration of the original petition and dismissal of the baseless appeal are sought to be questioned in this appeal before this Court. The grounds urged are essentially to the effect that only the application of condonation of delay was registered and the Tribunal had erred in allowing both the applications by its order dated 23.12.2021. It is also sought to be contended that the Tribunal could not have condoned the delay beyond 15 days - Both these grounds carry no substance and the appeal could only be dismissed at the threshold. There are no logic in the argument that the Tribunal could not have condoned the delay beyond 15 days. In support of this argument, learned counsel for the appellant would refer to the prescriptions in Section 61 of the Code, which provide for filing of appeal within 30 days and limiting the period for condonation of delay in filing the appeal to 15 days. It is beyond comprehension as to how such a prescription as regards the period of filing the appeal and the limited period for condonation of delay in filing such appeal could be imported for the purpose of consideration of the prayer for condonation of delay in filing an application for restoration - No other provision has been brought to our notice which limits or curtails the powers of the Tribunal to condone the delay in filing the application for restoration. It needs hardly any reiteration that the rules or procedure are essentially intended to serve the cause of justice and are not for punishment of the parties in conduct of their matters. No case for interference is made out - Appeal dismissed.
|