2026 (3) TMI 1512 - AT - IBC

Limitation for IBC appeals runs from open-court pronouncement; late certified-copy requests cannot extend time or cure delay.

In an appeal under Section 61(2) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, limitation runs from the day after pronouncement of the impugned order in ... Application for seeking condonation of delay - Limitation for appeal under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code - Commencement of limitation from the date of pronouncement in case it is pronounced in open court in the presence of the party Or from date of uploading in case it is not pronounced in open court and the party to the proceedings - Exclusion of time for obtaining certified copy. Commencement of limitation - Pronouncement and uploading of order - Certified copy and exclusion of time - The appeals were held barred by limitation, as the period for filing under Section 61 commenced from the date of pronouncement of the order and not from the later date asserted for uploading, and no exclusion under Section 12 of the Limitation Act was available since the certified copy was not applied for within the prescribed limitation period. - HELD THAT: - The Appellate Tribunal held that where the order had been pronounced in open court in the presence of the party, limitation began to run from that date. The appellant failed to place acceptable material to establish that the operative order became available only on the later date asserted, and the plea founded on a representation made to the Registry was rejected as such a representation was not a recognised judicial process for determining rights or limitation. The Tribunal further held that the interval between pronouncement and uploading represented the time taken by the Tribunal to prepare the order, and under the Explanation to Section 12 of the Limitation Act that period could not be excluded unless an application for certified copy had been made within the limitation period. Since the appellant applied for the certified copy only after expiry of the statutory period, the time taken in furnishing that copy could not be excluded, and the appeals, having been filed beyond the outer condonable limit, were not maintainable. [Paras 27, 28, 29, 30, 31] The delay was not condonable and both appeals were dismissed as barred by limitation. Final Conclusion: The Appellate Tribunal rejected the plea that limitation should run from the alleged later uploading of the order and held that, the order having been pronounced in open court, limitation commenced from the date of pronouncement. As the certified copy was sought only after expiry of the prescribed period, no exclusion of time was available and both appeals were dismissed as time-barred. Issues: Whether the company appeals were barred by limitation and whether the delay in filing could be condoned by reckoning limitation from the date of uploading of the impugned order and by excluding the time taken to obtain the certified copy.Analysis: The appeals arose from orders pronounced in open court on 01.08.2025. The statutory period under Section 61(2) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 had to be counted from the day after pronouncement. The party seeking exclusion under Section 12 of the Limitation Act, 1963 was required to apply for a certified copy within the limitation period so as to claim exclusion of the time requisite for obtaining it. The record showed that the certified copy was applied for only on 29.09.2025, long after expiry of the initial limitation period, and no reliable material established that the impugned order was first uploaded only on 26.09.2025. The gap between pronouncement and uploading, even if assumed, could not extend the limitation in the absence of a timely application for the certified copy. Section 4 of the Limitation Act, 1963 did not advance the case on these facts.Conclusion: The delay could not be condoned and the appeals were held to be time-barred.Ratio Decidendi: In an appeal under Section 61(2) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, limitation runs from pronouncement in open court, and exclusion of time for obtaining a certified copy under Section 12 of the Limitation Act, 1963 is unavailable unless the application for the copy is made within the prescribed limitation period.