CIRP timeline relief: consolidation proceedings do not count for exclusion, but additional extension may still be granted.

Time spent in consolidation proceedings was held not to qualify as "time taken in legal proceedings" for exclusion from the CIRP timeline, because only proceedings contemplated by the insolvency framework and connected with resolution can be excluded. The text also notes that a request framed as exclusion may, in substance, be treated as seeking extension of the CIRP period where that construction advances resolution over liquidation. On that approach, the tribunal found the earlier relief insufficient and granted further time, allowing the balance period sought.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the period spent in consolidation proceedings could be treated as time taken in legal proceedings in relation to the corporate debtor's resolution process so as to be excluded for computing the CIRP timeline. (ii) Whether the relief sought as exclusion of time could be granted as an extension of the CIRP period under the Code, and to what extent.

Issue (i): Whether the period spent in consolidation proceedings could be treated as time taken in legal proceedings in relation to the corporate debtor's resolution process so as to be excluded for computing the CIRP timeline.

Analysis: The expression used in the proviso is "time taken in legal proceedings in relation to such resolution process", which confines the exclusion to proceedings contemplated by the insolvency framework and connected with completion of the resolution process. Consolidation of company petitions is not a procedure prescribed by the insolvency statute, and a process not recognised by the Code cannot be introduced through interpretation to enlarge the statutory timeline. Subordinate regulations cannot override the principal statute, and a separate consolidation exercise does not answer the description of legal proceedings for the purpose of exclusion from CIRP time.

Conclusion: The period spent in consolidation proceedings could not be excluded as legal proceedings under the proviso.

Issue (ii): Whether the relief sought as exclusion of time could be granted as an extension of the CIRP period under the Code, and to what extent.

Analysis: The Code speaks in terms of extension of the CIRP period, and the tribunal treated the request for exclusion as one seeking extension in substance to advance the object of successful resolution and avoid liquidation. Section 60(5)(c) was applied to support jurisdiction over questions arising from insolvency proceedings, while the timeline provisions were read as directory and capable of liberal construction. On that approach, the previously granted 67 days' relief was found insufficient to cover the entire period sought, and the balance was allowed.

Conclusion: The prayer was allowed in part and the remaining 35 days' extension was granted.

Final Conclusion: The appeals succeeded only to the limited extent of securing additional time for completion of CIRP, while the contention that consolidation proceedings themselves counted for exclusion was rejected.

Ratio Decidendi: Only time spent in legal proceedings contemplated by the insolvency code and genuinely connected with completion of the resolution process can be counted for timeline relief, and a request styled as exclusion may be granted as extension where that construction best serves the statutory object of resolution.

---