Exclusion of delay in personal guarantor insolvency upheld where appellate pendency prevented timely resolution steps.

The tribunal treated the 208-day period spent in appellate proceedings as excludable for the personal guarantor insolvency resolution process, because the delay arose from pending appeals after reservation of judgment and was beyond the resolution professional's control. It applied the principle that no party should suffer for an act of court and held that the earlier appellate directions required determination of the actual amount payable before further steps in the company petitions. Section 101 was read as governing moratorium, not as barring exclusion of time, while Regulation 19(1) was held inapplicable and sections 100(4) and 104(2) were treated as procedural and not preventive of exclusion. The exclusion was upheld and the challenge failed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the period of 208 days spent in the appellate proceedings could be excluded while computing the time for the personal guarantor insolvency resolution process, and whether the provisions relied upon by the appellants barred such exclusion.

Analysis: The exclusion was sought to give effect to the earlier appellate directions requiring the adjudicating authority to determine the actual amount payable by the personal guarantor while proceeding further in the company petitions. The pendency of the appeals after reservation of judgment was treated as a circumstance beyond the control of the resolution professional, and the principle that no party should suffer because of an act of court was applied. The time stipulation in section 101 was read as governing moratorium and not as defeating exclusion of time for consequential proceedings. The tribunal also held that Regulation 19(1) was inapplicable to the issue, and that sections 100(4) and 104(2) were procedural and did not prevent the grant of exclusion.

Conclusion: The exclusion of 208 days was upheld and the challenge to the impugned order failed.

---