Appeal Dismissed for Delay in Filing: Importance of Timely Compliance and Substantial Evidence

The Appeal challenging the Order of the National Company Law Tribunal was dismissed due to the Appellant's failure to provide convincing reasons for the delay in filing. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of adhering to statutory timelines for filing Appeals under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, emphasizing the need for substantial evidence to support any delay claims. The Application for Condonation of Delay was rejected, leading to the dismissal of the Appeal for not meeting the required timelines and evidentiary standards.

---

---

Issues involved:
The issues involved in the judgment are the challenge to the Order of the National Company Law Tribunal, Division Bench in an Application under Section 60(5) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, and the Application for seeking Condonation of Delay in filing the Appeal.

Challenge to Order of NCLT:
The Appellant challenged the Order of the National Company Law Tribunal, Division Bench in an Application filed by the Liquidator under Section 60(5) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. The Appeal was filed with an Application seeking Condonation of Delay of 13 days due to the Appellant being Ex-Parte before the Tribunal and needing time to trace the voluminous record relating to previous proceedings. The Right to Appeal is a Statutory Right under Section 61 of the Code, providing a period of 30 days for filing an Appeal, extendable by 15 days with sufficient cause. However, the Appellant failed to provide evidence to prove the delayed knowledge of the Order and the reason for consulting voluminous records was deemed a weak excuse by the Tribunal.

Condonation of Delay Application:
The Tribunal examined the Application for Condonation of Delay and found the Appellant's reasons for delay unconvincing. The legislature has set a strict timeline for filing Appeals to ensure expeditious disposal of Litigation under the Code. The Appellant's casual approach and lack of substantial evidence led to the dismissal of the Application for Condonation of Delay. Consequently, the Appeal was also dismissed as it was not duly constituted following the rejection of the Condonation of Delay Application.

This judgment highlights the importance of timely filing of Appeals in adherence to statutory timelines and the necessity of providing sufficient cause for any delays in the legal proceedings.

---