2024 (10) TMI 511 - AT - IBC

NCLAT rejects appeals filed 16 days late under Section 61(2) IBC, refuses to condone delay beyond statutory 15-day limit

The NCLAT dismissed appeals filed with 16 days delay, refusing to condone the delay beyond the statutory 15-day limit under Section 61(2) of IBC. The ... Condonation of 15 days’ delay in filing the Appeals - time limitation - computation of limitation period - Whether the Appeal is filed with delay of 15 days or with delay of 16 days? - HELD THAT:- The law is well settled that limitation for filing the Appeal under Section 61 of the IBC commences after pronouncement of the order and in event, the certified copy is applied within 30 days, period which is consumed in preparation of certified copy of the order is excluded. Timelines under IBC are tightly circumscribed as has been held in V. Nagarajan [2021 (10) TMI 941 - SUPREME COURT (LB)]. The judgment of this Tribunal in Ashok Tiwari [2023 (11) TMI 313 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , PRINCIPAL BENCH , NEW DELHI] has no application in the facts of the present case. Since present is not a case of modification of the order. The Application filed by the Appellant in the above case for rectification of the order was partly allowed and order was modified and earlier order dated 17.01.2023 was modified, hence, this Tribunal held that earlier order stood merged with the subsequent order dated 21.03.2023. Present is not a case of any modification of the judgment dated 13.05.2024. The order delivered on 13.05.2024 in no manner was modified or changed. What was corrected was only a typographical error in the date of pronouncement which was wrongly mentioned as 13.06.2024 in place of 13.05.2024. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in V. Nagarajan [2021 (10) TMI 941 - SUPREME COURT (LB)] has categorically held that period of limitation in filing the Appeal commences from the date when order was pronounced. In “V. Nagarajan”, the order was passed on 31.12.2019 by the NCLT and the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that 30 days period expired on 30.01.2020. The proposition laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in V. Nagarajan is fully attracted in the present case. When the order was pronounced on 13.05.2024, 30 days period expired on 12.06.2024 and Appeal was filed on 28.06.2024 i.e. 16th day after expiry of limitation. The jurisdiction to condone the delay is limited to 15 days only as per Section 61(2) proviso. The delay of 16 days’ in filing these two Appeals cannot be condoned - appeal dismissed. Issues:Delay in filing appeals; computation of limitation period; correction of typographical error in order pronouncement date.The judgment pertains to two appeals filed before the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, where the appellants sought condonation of a 15-day delay in filing the appeals. The impugned order was pronounced on 13.05.2024, and the appeals were e-filed on 28.06.2024, 16 days after the 30-day limitation period expired. The main contention was whether the limitation period should commence from the original order date or the corrected date due to a typographical error. The appellant argued that the correction date should be considered, relying on a previous tribunal judgment, while the respondent emphasized the date of original order pronouncement. The tribunal analyzed the submissions and relevant legal principles to make its decision.The appellant contended that the limitation period for filing the appeal should commence from the corrected date of the order, i.e., 14.05.2024, instead of the original pronouncement date of 13.05.2024. They relied on a tribunal judgment where a similar situation led to the merging of the original and corrected orders for limitation computation purposes. However, the respondent argued that the appeal was filed beyond the condonable delay of 15 days, emphasizing the importance of the date of original order pronouncement in determining the limitation period. The tribunal considered these arguments in light of legal precedents and principles governing limitation periods in such cases.The tribunal referred to a Supreme Court judgment emphasizing the strict adherence to limitation periods under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC), highlighting the importance of filing appeals within the prescribed timelines. The court reiterated that the limitation period for filing an appeal commences after the order pronouncement, and any delays must be justified with sufficient cause. In this case, the tribunal determined that the appeal was filed 16 days after the limitation period expired, exceeding the condonable delay of 15 days. As such, the tribunal dismissed the delay condonation applications and rejected the appeals, citing the clear legal framework governing limitation periods under the IBC.---