TMI Blog2018 (9) TMI 274X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... llate Tribunal can entertain appeal after expiry of the said period of 45 days but within further period not exceeding 45 days, if the Tribunal is satisfied that the Appellants were prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal within that period. Looking at the present matter, the Impugned Order is dated 14th August, 2017. We intend to ignore the argument of the learned counsel for the Respondents that after 14th August, 2017, the matter in NCLT had been posted on 21st September, 2017 as Order sheet of presence is not shown. Even if we take the date of 10th October, 2017 when Certified Copy was issued, as the basis for calculating the period of limitation, still we find there are obstacles for the Appellants to cross. Certifie ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2015 challenging the maintainability of the said Transfer Company Petition 19 of 2015 filed by the present Respondents 1 to 4. According to the Appellants when the order was passed by NCLT, it was not displayed on the website for considerable period. The certified copy was applied for and collected on 10th October, 2018. It was, however, noticed that in the Order, the Interlocutory Application No.27 of 2017 was inadvertently marked as MA 109 of 2017 in place of IA 27 of 2017. The NCLT issued Corrigendum Order on 1st January, 2018 rectifying the inadvertent error. According to the Appellants if the period is calculated from the Corrigendum Order, the Appeal is within limitation. However, in case period of limitation begins from receipt of c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2018 (Page 89 A) is Corrigendum Order which was passed on the basis of the Appellants moving Praecipe dated 27th December, 2017 before NCLT seeking rectification with reference to the MA number. As what is impugned before us is the order dated 14th August, 2017, we have to look into the question of limitation from that date. Appellants are aggrieved by Order dated 14.08.2017 and Appeal filed is against that Order. We do not agree with the learned counsel for the Appellants that date of 1st January, 2018 would be relevant for the purpose of calculating delay. 5. Sub-Sections (1) to (3) of Section 421 of the Companies Act, 2013 are relevant for this matter and read as under: ( 1) Any person aggrieved by an order of the Tribunal may ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... SC/0099/2018 to state that after such 45 days, this Tribunal cannot condone further period. 7. When we look at the present matter, the Impugned Order is dated 14th August, 2017. We intend to ignore the argument of the learned counsel for the Respondents that after 14th August, 2017, the matter in NCLT had been posted on 21st September, 2017 as Order sheet of presence is not shown. Even if we take the date of 10th October, 2017 when Certified Copy was issued, as the basis for calculating the period of limitation, still we find there are obstacles for the Appellants to cross. 8. Page - 89 H of the appeal shows that certified true copy issued free of cost was issued on 10.10.2017. The Praecipe filed for correction before NCLT is dated 27 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
