TMI Blog2000 (8) TMI 62X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the contesting respondents submitted that the AAIFR's conclusions are on terra firma. Therefore, the only question that needs adjudication is whether the view of the AAIFR was correct. For resolution of the controversy the factual position, which is almost undisputed needs to be noted in brief. The Board for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction (in short the "BIFR") passed an order dated April 3, 1997, in respect of a petition filed by GTC Industries Ltd. under the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 (in short the "Act"). The petitioner was not a party before the BIFR. It filed Appeal No. 10 of 1999, on November 19, 1998. The AAIFR held that while computing the period of limitation prescribed under section 25 of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... received a copy of the order should be construed to be the starting point of limitation. In order to appreciate the rival submissions section 25 of the Act needs to be noted. The same reads as follows : "Appeal.--(1) Any person aggrieved by an order of the Board made under this Act may, within forty-five days from the date on which a copy of the order is issued to him, prefer an appeal to the Appellate Authority : Provided that the Appellate Authority may entertain any appeal after the said period of forty-five days but not after sixty days from the date aforesaid if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time. (2) On receipt of an appeal under sub-section (1), the Appellate A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the BIFR shall be communicated ; (b) the communication has to be under the signature of the secretary or any other officer of the Board duly empowered by the secretary in this behalf. Obviously, the order has to be issued by the Board and the manner in which it is to be authenticated is laid down in clause (2) of the regulation 15. Learned counsel for respondent No. 3 submitted that word used is "issued" and not "served" and the person who shall issue is not specifically provided and knowledge from any source other than the BIFR would suffice. We do not find any substance in the said stand, the scheme of the statute makes it clear that issuance of the order is an act to be undertaken by the BIFR. For the purpose of computation of period of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
