NCLAT Dismisses ED's Appeal as Time-Barred in IBC Resolution Plan Approval Case — Delay of 62 Days Not Condoned Due to Lack of Sufficient Cause.

Tribunals: National Company Law Appellate Tribunal Bench: CHENNAI
  • 187
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The Directorate of Enforcement (ED) filed an appeal under Section 61 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) challenging an order dated 07.01.2025 passed by the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), Kolkata Bench, which approved a resolution plan for Varutha Developers Pvt. Ltd. The appeal was filed with a delay of 14 days (or 62 days as per registry). The ED filed an application (I.A. No. 2327 of 2025) seeking condonation of delay, citing internal administrative procedures and time taken to obtain legal opinion as reasons. The NCLAT, after hearing both sides, held that the explanation did not constitute sufficient cause under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963. The court noted that the ED is a government body and must act with diligence. The delay was not condoned, and the appeal was dismissed as time-barred.

Headnote

A) Limitation Act - Condonation of Delay - Section 5 - Delay of 14 days in filing appeal under Section 61 of IBC - Appellant claimed delay due to internal administrative process and seeking legal opinion - Held that the explanation does not constitute sufficient cause for condonation of delay, as the appellant is a government body and must act diligently (Paras 1-16).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the delay of 14 days (or 62 days) in filing the appeal under Section 61 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 should be condoned.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The application for condonation of delay is dismissed. Consequently, the appeal is dismissed as time-barred.

Law Points

  • Condonation of delay
  • Limitation Act
  • Section 5
  • Section 61 of IBC
  • Sufficient cause
  • Delay of 14 days
  • Delay of 62 days
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2024 LawText (NCLAT) (01) 3

I.A. No. 2327 of 2025 in Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 605 of 2025

0000-00-00

Ashok Bhushan

For Appellant: Mr. Zoheb Hossain, Mr. Vivek Gurnani, Mr. Pranjal Tripathi, Mr. Kund and Mr. Vivek Gaurav. For Respondent: Mr. Abhijeet Sinha, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Sumesh Dhawan, Mr. Shwetank Ghinodia, Ms. Mini Aggarwal and Mr. Athak Walia for R-1; Mr. Arun Kathpalia, Sr. Advocate with Ms. Ruby Singh Ahuja, Ms. Aakriti Vohra, Ms. Roopali Gupta and Ms. Varsha Himatsingka for R-2; Mr. Krishnendu Datta, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Yash Tandon for CoC.

Directorate of Enforcement

Anil Kumar Mittal, Resolution Professional of Varutha Developers Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Application for condonation of delay in filing an appeal under Section 61 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016.

Remedy Sought

Condonation of delay of 14 days (or 62 days) in filing the appeal against the order dated 07.01.2025 of NCLT Kolkata.

Filing Reason

The appellant (Directorate of Enforcement) filed the appeal with delay due to internal administrative process and seeking legal opinion.

Previous Decisions

The NCLT Kolkata Bench approved the resolution plan of Varutha Developers Pvt. Ltd. on 07.01.2025.

Issues

Whether the delay of 14 days (or 62 days) in filing the appeal should be condoned.

Submissions/Arguments

Appellant submitted that the delay was due to internal administrative procedures and time taken to obtain legal opinion. Respondents opposed the condonation, arguing that the explanation does not constitute sufficient cause.

Ratio Decidendi

The explanation of internal administrative process and seeking legal opinion does not constitute sufficient cause for condonation of delay under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, especially when the appellant is a government body expected to act diligently.

Judgment Excerpts

This is an application praying for condonation of delay in filing of the appeal. The prayers in the applications are as follows: a) Condone the delay of 14 days in filing the present Appeal against the impugned order dated 07.01.2025 passed by the National Company Law Tribunal, Kolkata Bench (Court-II) in LA. (IB) (Plan) No. 21/KB/2024 in Company Petition (IB) No. 26/KB/2023; b. Without prejudice condone the delay of 62 days in filing the present Appeal from the date of the Impugned Order dated 07.01.2025 as directed to be added in the Prayer clause by the Registry.

Procedural History

The NCLT Kolkata Bench passed an order on 07.01.2025 approving the resolution plan. The Directorate of Enforcement filed an appeal under Section 61 of IBC on an unspecified date, which was delayed by 14 days (or 62 days as per registry). The appellant filed I.A. No. 2327 of 2025 seeking condonation of delay. The NCLAT heard the application and dismissed it, resulting in the dismissal of the appeal as time-barred.

Acts & Sections

  • Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016: 61
  • Limitation Act, 1963: 5
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
Tribunals NCLAT Dismisses ED's Appeal as Time-Barred in IBC Resolution Plan Approval Case — Delay of 62 Days Not Condoned Due to Lack of Sufficient Cause.
Related Judgement
High Court High Court of Bombay at Nagpur Dismisses Appeal by Insurance Company in Motor Accident Claim — Joint Liability of Truck and Jeep Insurers Upheld. The court affirmed the Tribunal's finding that both vehicles caused the accident, making the insurers ...