TMI Blog2023 (12) TMI 686X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as it has been held that such delay cannot be condoned by resorting even to Article 142 of the Constitution of India. In such a scenario, when the timeline is so strict, it is always incumbent upon the person who wanted to challenge the order of the Adjudicating Authority before the Appellate Authority to remain vigilant regarding his rights to file the appeal. The legislature has provided only 30 days for this purpose and then granted 15 days window to file the appeal but by assigning a sufficient cause that too to the satisfaction of the Appellate Tribunal. In the present case, however, the sufficient cause is conspicuous by its absence as it would not be a sufficient cause to hold that the Appellant is a resident of Kerala and the appeal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... reason given by the Appellant in the application on the anvil of sufficient cause and found that it is merely an excuse and not an explanation for not filing the appeal within the prescribed time. 5. It is needless to mention that right of appeal is the statutory right which has been provided with a caveat that the Appellant shall file the appeal within the period of 30 days and in case, the period of 30 days expire, he could file the appeal within a further period of 15 days but not beyond that. In this regard, reference may be had to Section 61 which is reproduced as under:- Section 61. Appeals and Appellate Authority (1) Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained under the Companies Act 2013 (18 of 2013), any person ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... upon the person who wanted to challenge the order of the Adjudicating Authority before the Appellate Authority to remain vigilant regarding his rights to file the appeal. The legislature has provided only 30 days for this purpose and then granted 15 days window to file the appeal but by assigning a sufficient cause that too to the satisfaction of the Appellate Tribunal. In the present case, however, the sufficient cause is conspicuous by its absence as it would not be a sufficient cause to hold that the Appellant is a resident of Kerala and the appeal had to be filed at Chennai and the Advocate took time in drafting the appeal etc. These are all lame excuses which cannot be considered as a sufficient cause, otherwise, in all appeals, this ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
