NCLAT Condones Delay in Re-filing of Memo of Appeal Due to Sufficient Reasons. Delay of 10 Days in Re-filing Condoned, Allowing Case to be Listed for Admission.

Tribunals: National Company Law Appellate Tribunal Bench: New Delhi
  • 3
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The case involved an application for extending the time granted for curing defects in a Memo of Appeal filed by the Appellant. The Appellant initially e-filed the Memo of Appeal on 03.07.2026, but upon scrutiny by the Office on 29.07.2026, defects were identified and communicated to the Appellant. The Appellant subsequently re-filed the Appeal on 15.08.2026. During the proceedings, no representative appeared for the Appellant. The Tribunal reviewed the Interlocutory Application and the Office report, considering the reasons provided by the Appellant for the delay. The Tribunal found the reasons sufficient and decided to condone the delay of 10 days in re-filing the Memo of Appeal. Consequently, the Tribunal ordered that the case be listed before the Hon’ble Bench for admission as a fresh case, thereby disposing of the Interlocutory Application.

Headnote

A) Company Law - Condonation of Delay - Extension of Time for Curing Defects - Companies Act, 2013 - The Appellant sought to extend the time for curing defects in the Memo of Appeal filed electronically. The Tribunal found sufficient reasons for the delay of 10 days in re-filing and condoned the delay, allowing the case to be listed for admission. Held that the delay was justified and the application was disposed of accordingly (Paras Not mentioned).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the delay in re-filing the Memo of Appeal should be condoned.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The Tribunal condoned the delay of 10 days in re-filing the Memo of Appeal and ordered the case to be listed for admission.

Law Points

  • Condonation of delay
  • e-filing procedures
  • defects in appeal
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2026 LawText (NCLAT) (09) 90

Interlocutory Application No.6112/2026, Un-numbered Company Appeal (AT) No.___/2026

2026-09-01

Raj Kumar

None appeared for appellant

Suresh Kumar Jalan and Ors.

East Coast Steel Limited and Ors.

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

Nature of Litigation

Application for extension of time to cure defects in Memo of Appeal.

Remedy Sought

Appellant sought to extend the time for curing defects.

Filing Reason

Initial Memo of Appeal filed electronically contained defects.

Issues

Condonation of delay in re-filing the Memo of Appeal

Submissions/Arguments

Appellant provided reasons for the delay in re-filing.

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal held that sufficient reasons were provided for the delay in re-filing the Memo of Appeal, justifying the condonation.

Judgment Excerpts

Considering the submissions made on behalf of the Appellant and for the reasons mentioned in the IA, which are found to be sufficient, the delay of 10 days in re-filing the Memo of Appeal is hereby condoned.

Procedural History

The Appellant e-filed the Memo of Appeal on 03.07.2026, defects were intimated on 29.07.2026, and the Appeal was re-filed on 15.08.2026.

Acts & Sections

  • Companies Act, 2013:
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Dismisses Petition Challenging Rejection of Amendment Application in Civil Suit — Amendment Sought After Trial Commenced Without Showing Due Diligence. Order VI Rule 17 CPC Proviso Bars Amendment After Trial Commences Unless Due D...
Related Judgement
High Court High Court of Karnataka Upholds Respondent's Application Under Arbitration Act — Jurisdiction Affirmed in Bengaluru.