National Company Law Appellate Tribunal Dismisses Appeal Due to Delay in Filing. The Appellant failed to demonstrate sufficient cause for the delay in filing the appeal under Section 61 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016.

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

Case Note & Summary

The case involved an appeal filed by Sun Paper Ltd. against an order of the National Company Law Tribunal, Chennai, dated 12.05.2023, concerning an application filed by the Liquidator under Section 60(5) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. The Appellant sought condonation of a 13-day delay in filing the appeal, claiming it was unaware of the order until 27.05.2023 due to being Ex-Parte in the proceedings. The Appellant argued that the delay was caused by the need to consult voluminous records from previous proceedings. The court examined the application for condonation of delay and noted that the Appellant did not provide any evidence to substantiate its claim of late knowledge of the order. The court found the reasons provided by the Appellant to be insufficient and lacking credibility, emphasizing the importance of adhering to the statutory timeline for appeals as stipulated in the Code. Consequently, the application for condonation of delay was dismissed, leading to the dismissal of the appeal itself as it was not duly constituted. The decision underscored the necessity for timely action in insolvency proceedings to ensure expeditious resolution of disputes.

Headnote

A) Insolvency Law - Right to Appeal - Statutory Right - Section 61 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 - The Appellant challenged the order of the National Company Law Tribunal and sought condonation of delay in filing the appeal. The court held that the Appellant failed to provide sufficient cause for the delay and dismissed the application (Paras 1-10).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the delay of 13 days in filing the appeal should be condoned.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The application for condonation of delay was dismissed, leading to the dismissal of the appeal as it was not duly constituted.

Law Points

  • Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code
  • 2016
  • Right to Appeal
  • Condonation of Delay
  • Statutory Limitation
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2026 LawText (NCLAT) (08) 143

I.A. No.671/2023 in Company Appeal (AT) (CH) (Ins) No. 205/2023

2023-07-21

Justice Rakesh Kumar Jain, Mrs. Shreesha Merla

Mr. T. K. Bhaskar, Mr. B. Dhanaraj, Mr. Karthik Seshadri, AM Ilango

Sun Paper Ltd.

S. Dhanapal, Liquidator, M/s.Servalakshmi Paper Ltd.

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

Nature of Litigation

Appeal against an order of the National Company Law Tribunal regarding a Liquidator's application.

Remedy Sought

Condonation of delay in filing the appeal.

Filing Reason

Appellant claimed late knowledge of the order due to being Ex-Parte.

Previous Decisions

The order of the National Company Law Tribunal dated 12.05.2023.

Issues

Whether the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned. Whether the Appellant provided sufficient cause for the delay.

Submissions/Arguments

The Appellant was unaware of the order until 27.05.2023 due to being Ex-Parte. The Appellant needed to consult voluminous records, causing the delay.

Ratio Decidendi

The court emphasized the importance of adhering to statutory timelines for filing appeals under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, and found the reasons for delay insufficient.

Judgment Excerpts

The Right to Appeal is a Statutory Right in view of Section 61 of the Code. The Applicant has further submitted that it had to consult voluminous record of the period from 2018.

Procedural History

The appeal was filed after the National Company Law Tribunal's order dated 12.05.2023, with an application for condonation of delay filed alongside.

Acts & Sections

  • Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016: Section 60, Section 61
  • Companies Act, 2013:
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Dismisses Appeal in Property Dispute Case Due to Adverse Possession. Plaintiffs' Claim Barred by Limitation as Defendants Established Continuous Possession Since 1928.
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Modifies National Commission's Order on Insurance Claim Payment Due to Title Issues. Payment in Indian Currency Ordered as Title of Goods Not Passed to Consignee Under CIF Contract.