2025 (3) TMI 513 - AT - IBC

NCLAT Allows 11-Day Delay in Appeal Due to Appellant's Unfamiliarity and Medical Certificate Under Rule 15 Extension.

Atul Babulal Prajapati & Anr. (Suspended Director and Promoter of WSH Pvt. Ltd.) Versus Suhas Dinkar Bhattbhatt & Ors

The NCLAT granted condonation of an 11-day delay in filing an appeal, which was within the permissible 15-day extension period. The Tribunal considered ... Condonation of delay of 15 days in filing the Appeal - case of the Respondent is that Appeal has been filed on 46th day, hence, Appeal has been filed beyond condonable period and delay condonation application deserves to be rejected - date of knowledge of order - Genuiness of medical document which has been filed by the Appellant along with additional-affidavit. Whether the appeal is filed within condonable period of 15 days or appeal has been filed beyond 15 days? - HELD THAT:- It is settled law that jurisdiction to condone the delay vested in this Tribunal is only 15 days as per Section 61(2) proviso. The order was delivered on 01.10.2024. As per Rule 3 of the NCLAT Rules, 2016, the day from which the said period reckoned shall be excluded. Thus, 01.10.2024 has to be excluded - For computing the 30 days’ period, if the last day expires on a day when the office of the Tribunal is closed, that day and any succeeding day on which the Appellate Tribunal remains closed shall also be excluded. After excluding 01.10.2024 from computation, limitation of 30 days was expiring on 31.10.2024. From 30.10.2024 to 03.11.2024, it was holidays both for the Court as well as the Registry (Diwali Holidays) In BSE Limited vs. Mrudula Brodie & Ors. [2025 (2) TMI 962 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , PRINCIPAL BENCH , NEW DELHI] it is held that for computing 30 days’ period, if 30th day is fallen on holiday, the said period also need to be excluded. In the present case, 03.11.2024 being holiday for office also, the last day of limitation for filing the appeal on 04.11.2024. Appeal admittedly has been filed on 15.11.2024, hence, while computing the limitation as per Rule 3, the delay in filing the appeal shall be 11 days. Appellant in the application, however, has come up with the case that 15 days’ delay be condoned. The delay in filing the appeal is within the condonable period, delay being only 11 days in filing the appeal. Next submission of the Respondent that the case of the Appellant is that he came to know about the order only on 23.10.2024 and he was communicated on 01.10.2024 itself by WhatsApp call by liquidator - HELD THAT:- The question as to when the appellant came to know about the order is inconsequential, since the limitation for filing the appeal shall begin from the date of pronouncement of the order and 01.10.2024 being to be excluded as per Rule 3, 30th day shall be on 31.10.2024 which as noted above was holiday for the office. Appeal could have been filed on 04.11.2024 i.e. on the reopening day. Genuiness of medical document which has been filed by the Appellant along with additional-affidavit - HELD THAT:- TThe said medical certificate has no bearing in the present case since delay of 15 days has to be explained by the appellant after expiry of period. Appellant in his application for condonation as well as in additional affidavit has pleaded that he has approached his counsel on 10.11.2024 and gave instructions. The delay in filing the appeal is within condonable period as noted above. It is further to be noted that Appellant claims to be vegetable vendor who has pleaded that he is not familiar with legal procedure. Conclusion - There is sufficient cause for condonation of delay which is within condonable period. Delay condonation application is allowed. The appeal before the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal involved a request for condonation of a 15-day delay in filing the appeal against an order passed by the Adjudicating Authority. The key issues considered in the judgment are as follows:Issues Presented and Considered:1. Whether the appeal was filed within the condonable period of 15 days.2. Whether there was sufficient cause for condonation of the delay in filing the appeal.3. The relevance of the appellant's knowledge of the order date in relation to the limitation period for filing the appeal.4. The authenticity and relevance of the medical certificate submitted by the appellant as a reason for the delay.Issue-Wise Detailed Analysis:1. The Court analyzed the relevant legal framework, specifically Rule 3 of the NCLAT Rules, 2016, which excludes the day of pronouncement of the order when computing the limitation period. The Court interpreted the rule to calculate the 30-day period for filing the appeal, excluding holidays. The Court referred to a previous judgment regarding the exclusion of holidays falling on the last day of the limitation period.2. The Court considered the appellant's argument regarding the date of knowledge of the order and the respondent's contention that the appellant was informed of the order earlier. The Court cited the Supreme Court's ruling that the limitation for filing an appeal starts from the date of pronouncement of the order, regardless of when the appellant became aware of it. The Court concluded that the date of knowledge was irrelevant in this case.3. Regarding the medical certificate submitted by the appellant, the Court noted that it indicated backache since 25.09.2024, but emphasized that the delay of 15 days needed to be explained after the expiry of the period. The Court found that the appellant's lack of familiarity with legal procedures, being a vegetable vendor, was a relevant factor in considering the delay.Significant Holdings:The Court held that the delay of 11 days in filing the appeal was within the condonable period of 15 days. The Court found that there was sufficient cause for condonation of the delay and allowed the application. The appeal was listed for admission on a specific date.In conclusion, the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal granted the condonation of delay in filing the appeal, considering the exclusion of certain days in the computation of the limitation period and the appellant's circumstances. The Court emphasized the importance of adhering to procedural timelines while also taking into account the appellant's situation and level of understanding of legal processes.