Tribunal grants condonation for Company Appeals, correcting name error, allowing admission.

The tribunal granted condonation of delay in filing Company Appeals due to a typographical error in the name of the Corporate Debtor, allowing the appeals to proceed for admission on 28.04.2023. The respondents' argument that the limitation period should commence from the date the order was pronounced was countered by the tribunal's recognition of the initial error in the entity named in the order. The correction of the debtor's name was not known to the appellant at the time of the original order, justifying the delay in filing the appeals.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Condonation of delay in filing Company Appeals.
2. Commencement of limitation period for filing an appeal.
3. Typographical error in the name of the Corporate Debtor.

Summary:

Condonation of Delay in Filing Company Appeals:
The appellant filed two I.As seeking condonation of delay in filing Company Appeal (AT) (Ins.) Nos. 351 & 352 of 2023 against orders dated 13.01.2023 and 17.01.2023. The appeals were e-filed on 15.03.2023. The appellant argued that the orders were ex-parte and initially passed against "Mansfield Cables Company & Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd.", not the Corporate Debtor "Mansfield Power & Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd." The appellant received information about the order on 07.02.2023 and filed the appeal with a delay of 6 days, requesting condonation.

Commencement of Limitation Period for Filing an Appeal:
Respondents opposed the delay condonation, arguing that the order dated 13.01.2023 was not ex-parte and the limitation period should commence from the date the order was pronounced. They cited the Supreme Court judgment in "V. Nagarajan vs. SKS Ispat and Power Limited & Ors." which states that the limitation period begins from the date the order is pronounced. The tribunal agreed that the limitation for filing an appeal commences from the date of pronouncement but noted that the order was initially against a different entity.

Typographical Error in the Name of the Corporate Debtor:
The adjudicating authority acknowledged a typographical error in the name of the Corporate Debtor and corrected it on 17.01.2023. The tribunal observed that the order dated 13.01.2023 was against "Mansfield Cables Company & Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd." and not "Mansfield Power & Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd." The correction was not in the knowledge of the present Corporate Debtor on the date of the original order. The tribunal concluded that the limitation period should commence when the correct order was communicated to the appellant.

Conclusion:
The tribunal found that the appellant was justified in seeking condonation of delay due to the initial error in the corporate debtor's name. The delay was condoned, and the appeals were listed for admission on 28.04.2023.

---