National Company Law Appellate Tribunal Dismisses Appeal Due to Limitation. Appeal was dismissed as it was filed beyond the limitation period prescribed under Section 421(3) of the Companies Act, 2013.

Tribunals: National Company Law Appellate Tribunal Bench: CHENNAI
  • 1
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The appeal was filed by a shareholder of Sri Sai Pardha Real Estates Pvt. Ltd. against the Registrar of Companies after the company's name was struck off for failing to submit financial statements for the year 1994-1995. The Registrar's order was dated 02.07.2018, and the appellant sought to challenge an order dated 15.06.2022, which was rejected by the Adjudicating Authority. The appellant contended that the appeal was filed within the limitation period, claiming an original e-filing date of 15.07.2022, but the respondents raised a preliminary objection regarding the limitation, stating that the appeal was e-filed on 07.09.2023, which was beyond the 45-day limit set by Section 421(3) of the Companies Act, 2013. The court examined the records and found no evidence of the original e-filing on 15.07.2022, confirming that the only valid e-filing was on 07.09.2023. The court noted that the impugned order was made public on 27.06.2022, thus the appeal was indeed filed late. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed on the grounds of limitation.

Headnote

A) Company Law - Limitation Period - Filing of Appeal - Companies Act, 2013, Section 421 - The appeal was dismissed as it was filed beyond the limitation period prescribed under Section 421(3) of the Companies Act, 2013. The court found that the appeal was e-filed on 07.09.2023, which was beyond the 45-day limit from the date the order was made available, thus rendering the appeal barred by limitation. Held that the appeal was dismissed on this ground (Paras 3-6).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the appeal was filed within the prescribed limitation period under the Companies Act, 2013.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The appeal was dismissed on the grounds of limitation as it was filed beyond the 45-day period prescribed under Section 421(3) of the Companies Act, 2013.

Law Points

  • Limitation period
  • e-filing
  • Companies Act
  • 2013
  • Section 421
  • appeal dismissal
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2026 LawText (NCLAT) (08) 124

Company Appeal (AT) (CH) No. 22 /2024

2026-01-22

Justice Sharad Kumar Sharma, Jatindranath Swain

Mr. Avinash Krishnan Ravi, Ms. Renuka Parameswari, Mr. Prithvi Raj JS, Mr. B. Dhanaraj, Ms. Deepa Mariappan

P. Venugopal

The Registrar of Companies

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

Nature of Litigation

Appeal against the order of the Registrar of Companies regarding the striking off of a company's name.

Remedy Sought

The appellant sought to challenge the order of the Registrar of Companies.

Filing Reason

The company failed to submit its financial statements.

Previous Decisions

The order of the Registrar of Companies was upheld by the Adjudicating Authority.

Issues

Whether the appeal was filed within the limitation period Validity of e-filing dates

Submissions/Arguments

The appellant argued that the appeal was filed in time based on an original e-filing date. The respondents contended that the appeal was barred by limitation as it was filed after the prescribed period.

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was dismissed due to failure to file within the limitation period as prescribed by the Companies Act, 2013.

Judgment Excerpts

The appeal has been preferred by invoking the provisions contained under Section 421 of the Companies Act, 2013. The instant appeal is barred by limitation for the reason that the impugned order under challenge is that of 15.06.2022. The appeal was dismissed on this limited ground only.

Procedural History

The appellant filed an appeal against the order of the Registrar of Companies, which was rejected by the Adjudicating Authority. The appeal was subsequently filed before the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal.

Acts & Sections

  • Companies Act, 2013: Section 421
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Upholds Employees' Right to Bonus Under Payment of Bonus Act, 1965 — Clarifies Applicability Despite Authorised Controller Appointment.
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Dismisses Appeal in Property Dispute Over Inheritance and Limitation Under Mysore Hindu Law Women's Rights Act, 1933. The Court held that the suit for recovery of possession was barred by limitation as the appellants filed beyond 12 yea...