Just a moment...
Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →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 delay in filing the appeal against the order approving the resolution plan was liable to be condoned, and whether the appellant could be permitted to proceed without initially filing the certified copy of the impugned order.
Analysis: The appeal was filed beyond the date of the impugned order, but the record showed that the order had been uploaded later, and the appellant sought to compute limitation from the date of uploading. The Tribunal considered the Supreme Court's decisions emphasising that a litigant is obliged to apply for the certified copy under Rule 22 of the National Company Law Tribunal Rules, 2016, while also recognising that an application for exemption from filing the certified copy can be entertained. The Tribunal further relied on the later Supreme Court order in Omkara Assets Reconstruction Private Limited, where delay was condoned on acceptance of the explanation furnished. The Tribunal also noticed that in a connected appeal against the same order, delay had already been condoned on the basis that the order was uploaded on 28.10.2025.
Conclusion: The delay in filing the appeal was condoned, and the appellant was permitted to pursue the appeal without immediate filing of the certified copy, with liberty to place it on record within two weeks.