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 an appeal e-filed at 9.00 P.M. on the last day of the condonable period could be treated as filed on that day, and whether the delay of 15 days in filing the appeal was liable to be condoned.
Analysis: The limitation for filing an appeal under Section 61(2) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 was considered alongside the NCLAT Rules, 2016, particularly Rule 22 governing presentation of appeals and Rules 103 and 104 enabling electronic filing and issuance of directions to meet procedural contingencies. The Tribunal also noticed its own order dated 24.12.2022 clarifying that limitation is computed from the date of e-filing, and declined to apply Delhi High Court E-filing Rules in the absence of any notification making them applicable to NCLAT. Relying on the settled meaning of the word "day" as a 24-hour period commencing at midnight, and on the principle that procedural rules cannot curtail the statutory period of limitation, the Tribunal held that the appeal filed at 9.00 P.M. on 30.03.2026 was within the permissible time. It further found the explanation offered for the delay sufficient.
Conclusion: The delay was liable to be condoned, and the application for condonation was allowed.
Ratio Decidendi: Where statute permits filing within a prescribed period with condonable delay, the term "day" denotes a full 24-hour period ending at midnight, and procedural filing rules cannot shorten the statutory limitation unless expressly applicable and authorised.