Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the appeal was filed within limitation under Section 61(2) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, and within the maximum condonable period.
Analysis: The appeal under Section 61(2) had to be filed within 30 days, with a further condonable period not exceeding 15 days. The limitation was held to commence from the date of pronouncement of the order in open court, not from the date of uploading. The order recorded delivery on 21.04.2025, and there was no material to show that it was not pronounced on that date. Uploading was treated as an administrative act and not the trigger for limitation. On that computation, the appeal filed on 10.06.2025 was beyond the outer limit of 45 days, and the Tribunal could not entertain it. The merits of the restoration challenge were not examined because the limitation bar was held to be decisive.
Conclusion: The appeal was time-barred and not maintainable, and the limitation objection succeeded against the appellant.
Ratio Decidendi: For an appeal under Section 61(2) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, limitation begins from the date of pronouncement in open court, and once the statutory period of 30 days plus the maximum condonable 15 days expires, the appellate tribunal lacks jurisdiction to entertain the appeal.