Limitation under the Insolvency Code runs from pronouncement of the order, and delay beyond the condonable period was refused.

Limitation for an appeal under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 was held to run from the date of pronouncement of the impugned order, not from the date of later knowledge or receipt of communication. Section 61 provides a special limitation framework of thirty days with a further condonable period of fifteen days, and that regime prevails over the broader approach under the Companies Act, 2013. Prior authorities did not establish that limitation begins only on knowledge of the order, and the record did not support the appellant's claimed date of first receipt. As the delay was not shown to fall within the condonable period, condonation was refused.

---

---

Issues: Whether delay in filing the appeal against the insolvency order was liable to be condoned, and whether limitation under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 ran from the date of knowledge or from the date of pronouncement of the order.

Analysis: The appeal was governed by Section 61 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, which prescribes a period of thirty days with a further condonable period of fifteen days. The limitation framework under the Code is special and overrides the broader limitation approach under the Companies Act, 2013. The order under challenge had to be treated as having triggered limitation on pronouncement, not on later knowledge or receipt of communication. The prior authorities relied upon did not support the proposition that limitation under Section 61 begins only on knowledge of the order. The record also did not support the asserted date on which the appellant claimed to have first received the order.

Conclusion: The delay was not shown to be within the condonable period, and the application for condonation of delay was rejected.

---