Condonation of delay requires a full and satisfactory explanation; general settlement efforts and recovery proceedings were insufficient here.

Condonation of a 1150-day delay under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, read with Section 238A and Section 60(5) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, requires a satisfactory explanation of the entire period of delay. The Tribunal found the applicant's explanation general and unsupported by a day-to-day account, and held that references to parallel recovery proceedings and settlement efforts did not amount to sufficient cause, especially where default had occurred years earlier and recovery action was already underway. The delay was treated as inordinate and unexplained, so condonation was refused; the interlocutory application was rejected and the company petition dismissed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the delay of 1150 days in filing the company petition should be condoned under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 read with Section 238A and Section 60(5) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016.

Analysis: The application for condonation was filed separately and substantially later than the main company petition, and the applicant was required to explain the entire delay, including the period after filing of the petition. The explanation offered was found to be general and unsupported by a day-to-day or otherwise satisfactory account of the delay. The Tribunal held that merely referring to parallel recovery proceedings and settlement efforts did not constitute sufficient cause, especially where the default had occurred years earlier and recovery action had already been initiated. The delay was held to be inordinate and not properly explained.

Conclusion: The delay was not condoned and the interlocutory application was rejected. Consequently, the company petition also stood dismissed.

Ratio Decidendi: Condonation of delay under Section 5 of the Limitation Act requires a proper and satisfactory explanation of the entire period of delay amounting to sufficient cause; an inordinate and unexplained delay cannot be condoned merely on general assertions of diligence or ongoing recovery efforts.

---