9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (11) TMI 1553X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dv. For the Respondent : Tomu Francis and Arka Saha, Advs. ORDER JUSTICE TARUN AGARWALA, PRESIDING OFFICER. - 1. The present appeal has been filed against the order dated 11th May, 2018 by which the appellant Company has been delisted under Regulation 22(2) of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Delisting of Equity Shares) Regulations, 2009. There is a delay of 316 days in filing the p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cer in charge went on leave in August and only came back in the end of September and, since then, the appellant was making correspondence with the stock exchanges and accordingly contended that the delay in filing the appeal has been sufficiently explained and that the delay should be condoned. 2. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties. Against an order of delisting, an appeal is requi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed immediately thereafter but they did not do so and only filed after an inordinate delay of 316 days. 4. We also find that in the additional affidavit no proof has been filed to show that the officer who was in charge had gone on leave or that the Company was in correspondence with the stock exchange throughout. In the absence of any documentary proof, the ground urged in the additional affidavi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of judicial discretion in condoning the delay after sufficient cause and/or adequate reason is given. In the instant case, we find that no bona fide reasons had been given for condoning the inordinate delay. We are of the opinion that it is the requirement of law that an application for condonation of delay cannot be allowed as a matter of right on payment of cost especially in the absence of adeq ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
