https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=426411 Condonation of a 1150-day delay under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, read with Section 238A and Section 60(5) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, requires a satisfactory explanation of the entire period of delay. The Tribunal found the applicant's explanation general and unsupported by a day-to-day account, and held that references to parallel recovery proceedings and settlement efforts did not amount to sufficient cause, especially where default had occurred years earlier and recovery action was already underway. The delay was treated as inordinate and unexplained, so condonation was refused; the interlocutory application was rejected and the company petition dismissed. en-us Wed, 10 Aug 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 16 Aug 2022 19:36:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=426411 Condonation of a 1150-day delay under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, read with Section 238A and Section 60(5) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, requires a satisfactory explanation of the entire period of delay. The Tribunal found the applicant's explanation general and unsupported by a day-to-day account, and held that references to parallel recovery proceedings and settlement efforts did not amount to sufficient cause, especially where default had occurred years earlier and recovery action was already underway. The delay was treated as inordinate and unexplained, so condonation was refused; the interlocutory application was rejected and the company petition dismissed. Case-Laws Insolvency and Bankruptcy Wed, 10 Aug 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=426411