9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (4) TMI 17X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l) For the Appellant : Mr. Arjun Sheth, Mr. Rajiv Chawla, Ms. Kriti Kothari and Ms. Henna George, Advocates For the Respondent : Mr. Palash S. Singhai and Mr. Harshal Sareen, Advocates ORDER ( Hybrid Mode ) [ Per : Arun Baroka, Member ( Technical ) ] The present Appeal has been preferred seeking to set aside the order dated 26.04.2024 passed by the Hon'ble National Company Law Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench in CP(IB) No. 300 of 2022 with IA No. 85 of 2024 in CP(IB) No. 300 of 2022 wherein the Hon'ble AA vide the impugned order had allowed the insolvency petition being CP(IB) No. 300 of 2022 which was filed by the Respondent no. 1 herein and rejected the Application being IA No. 85 of 2024 in CP(IB) No. 300 of 2022 which was filed by t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... red to be filed therefore, the original sets of the documents were to be procured and thereafter the copies of the same were required to be filled. 4. That since time was concurred in procurement of the original documents and thereafter coordination between the appellant and counsel for the appellant for filing of the said documents there was a delay in refiling of the appeal." 6. The Respondent No.1 has vehemently opposed the grounds cited by the Appellant seeking condonation of delay in refiling of the appeal. It claims that delay was for an inordinate long period of 160 days and does not deserve condonation as no substantial reasoning has been provided in the application. It also claims that the Appeal has still been listed with defec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... showing sufficient cause, even within the period of delay which is capable of being condoned. IBC is a watershed legislation which seeks to overhaul the previous bankruptcy regime which was afflicted by delays and indefinite legal proceedings. IBC sought to structure and streamline the entire process of insolvency, right from the initiation of insolvency to liquidation, as a one-stop mechanism." 9. It is also contended that the Hon'ble Supreme Court has denounced delay in filing litigation and held the power to condone delay is to be tightly circumscribed and conditional only, upon showing sufficient cause, which is glaringly amiss in the present case. It is submitted that the overall purpose of specifying a stringent time frame under the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l bottlenecks by the Applicant, to which no proof has been annexed by the Applicant/Appellant to the instant Application. It is claimed that the averment made by the Applicant has no leg to stand upon. 10. We have heard both sides and perused materials placed on record. We find that the impugned order was passed on 26.04.2024 and the appeal was filed on the 45th day and the appellant has sought condonation of 15 days delay, which was condoned. On condoning the refiling delay of 160 days explanation provided by the Appellant does not inspire much confidence. The Appellant was intimated about the defects on 02.07.2024. As per Rule 26 of National Company Law Appellate Tribunal Rules, 2016 defects were to be removed within 7 days from the date ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
