Mandatory limitation under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code bars condonation beyond the statutory extension period for appeals.

A fixed limitation period under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 was treated as mandatory, with only a limited 15-day discretionary extension after the initial 30 days. The Appellate Tribunal held that it had no power to condone a delay beyond that statutory outer limit, so a belated appeal filed after 1027 days was barred. The absence of an application for a certified copy within time did not assist the appellant, and COVID-19 limitation suspension orders did not revive a delay that had already expired before the relevant suspension period. The condonation application therefore failed.

---

---

Issues: Whether a delay of 1027 days in filing the appeal under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 could be condoned and the appeal entertained beyond the statutory limitation period.

Analysis: The appeal was filed far beyond the period prescribed under Section 61(2) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. The provision permits filing within 30 days and, on sufficient cause, a further period not exceeding 15 days. The time limit was treated as mandatory and the Appellate Tribunal held that it had no power to condone delay beyond the statutory ceiling. The absence of a timely application for certified copy did not assist the appellant, and the reliance on the extended limitation period arising from the COVID-19 orders did not cure a delay that had already run out before the relevant suspension period.

Conclusion: The delay was not condonable and the application for condonation of delay failed.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a special statute prescribes a fixed limitation period with a limited discretionary extension, the appellate forum cannot condone delay beyond that outer limit, and an appeal filed after expiry of that period is barred.

---