Mandatory limitation under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code barred a delayed appeal; internal approval delays were not sufficient cause.

Section 42 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code was treated as mandatory, requiring strict compliance with liquidation timelines, so the appeal filed with a delay of 207 days was held time-barred. Internal approval formalities within a financial institution were found insufficient to constitute sufficient cause, and the absence of evidence explaining the inordinate delay defeated condonation. The plea that the provision was merely directory was rejected, and lack of prejudice to the opposite party was held irrelevant to the statutory test for condonation. The appeal was therefore rejected as barred by limitation.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appeal under Section 42 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 was barred by limitation and whether the delay of 207 days in filing the appeal could be condoned.

Analysis: The limitation under Section 42 was treated as mandatory because the liquidation process requires strict adherence to statutory timelines. The reason offered for the delay, namely internal approval formalities within a financial institution, was held to be insufficient and incapable of constituting sufficient cause. The Court also held that no evidence was produced to justify the inordinate delay, and that the plea that the provision was directory could not be accepted. The absence of prejudice to the opposite party was held to be irrelevant to condonation under the statute.

Conclusion: The delay was not condonable, and the appeal was rightly rejected as time-barred.

---