Limitation and Section 14 exclusion failed where no due diligence or good faith was shown, and the outer limit barred condonation.

Limitation under Section 61(2) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code runs from the date of pronouncement of the impugned order, and the appellate tribunal cannot condone delay beyond the statutory outer limit of 15 days after the initial 30 days. The appellant's request to exclude time under Section 14 of the Limitation Act failed because the earlier appeal did not validly challenge the impugned order within limitation and the record showed no due diligence or good faith. As good faith under Section 2(h) requires due care and attention, which was absent, the condonation application was not maintainable and the delay could not be condoned.

---

---

Issues: Whether the delay of 117 days in filing the appeal could be condoned and whether the appellant was entitled to exclusion of time under Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963.

Analysis: The limitation for an appeal under Section 61(2) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 runs from the date of pronouncement of the impugned order, with a maximum condonable delay of 15 days beyond the initial 30 days. The appellant had sought to rely on the earlier appeal and to exclude the intervening period under Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963, but the earlier appeal did not validly challenge the impugned order within limitation and the record showed no due diligence or good faith. The concept of good faith under Section 2(h) of the Limitation Act, 1963 requires due care and attention, which was found lacking. In view of the binding law that the appellate tribunal cannot condone delay beyond the statutory outer limit, the application for condonation could not be entertained.

Conclusion: The delay condonation application was not maintainable and the delay could not be condoned.

---