Admissibility of electronic evidence bars undervaluation demands where printouts, retracted statements and no cross-examination leave the case unprove...
Limitation in oppression and mismanagement proceedings: prior knowledge of removal and dilution barred the challenge, with valuation directions upheld...
Insolvency professional agency governance rules amended to add nominee directors, tighten independent director eligibility, and regulate managing dire...
The judgment addresses the jurisdiction and competence of the Appellate Authority u/s 107(4) of the Act of 2017 to condone delays in filing appeals against decisions or orders passed by an adjudicating authority beyond the prescribed time limit. The Court relied on the Supreme Court's decision in Bengal Chemists and Druggists Association v. Kalyan Chowdhury, which interpreted a similar provision in the Companies Act, 2013. It held that the Appellate Authority cannot entertain an appeal u/s 107 if it is filed beyond four months from the date of communication of the decision or order. While the High Court has extraordinary jurisdiction to condone delays in exceptional circumstances to prevent gross injustice, the reasons provided by the petitioner were found insufficient to warrant such exercise. Consequently, the writ petitions were dismissed as lacking merit.
The judgment addresses the jurisdiction and competence of the Appellate Authority u/s 107(4) of the Act of 2017 to condone delays in filing appeals against decisions or orders passed by an adjudicating authority beyond the prescribed time limit. The Court relied on the Supreme Court's decision in Bengal Chemists and Druggists Association v. Kalyan Chowdhury, which interpreted a similar provision in the Companies Act, 2013. It held that the Appellate Authority cannot entertain an appeal u/s 107 if it is filed beyond four months from the date of communication of the decision or order. While the High Court has extraordinary jurisdiction to condone delays in exceptional circumstances to prevent gross injustice, the reasons provided by the petitioner were found insufficient to warrant such exercise. Consequently, the writ petitions were dismissed as lacking merit.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4811 
Join Channel 
